POSTER + PEER ASSESSMENT
GG2509: ENVIRONMENT AND
SOCIETY
Dr Nick Spedding
n.spedding@abdn.ac.uk
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Tim, Antonio, Helmut, Piotr (G&E), Anita, Christine, Rianne (IT Services)
Course revamp



Staff changes
CREF revalidation + in-house review
Concepts + case studies
6CC wish list...




Inter-disciplinary
No pre-reqs
Non-traditional delivery + assessment
100% coursework
 (3 assignments)
Why group work?


Cuts down marking!
 75%
Collaborative skills
Why posters?






Something different
Supports concepts + case studies approach
Communications skills (GAs)
Creative
Social
FUN?
Why peer assessment?





Curiosity + scepticism...
Promote engagement + reflection (GAs)
Generate more feedback
Appropriate to poster format – audience reception
Address subjectivity
 8-10 people contribute to overall mark
What did we need to do?









Write a task brief
Lecture slots to introduce this + suggest ideas
Organise groups + allocate staff mentors
Training for poster design
New mark criteria
New peer assessment form
Publish posters on MyAberdeen + put on wall
Mark the posters (staff + students)
Collate + distribute feedback
Task brief
Posters must:
 Clearly identify an appropriate issue relevant to the
course and address this using a suitable case study or
selection of examples;
 Draw on at least one of the conceptual frameworks
we have covered in lectures;
 Elucidate appropriate aspects of controversy /
debate;
 Be clear and attractive in their use of text, images
and colour, with clear layout/flow.
Assessment breakdown
40%
50%
10%
Staff mark using standard Level 2 descriptors –
CONTENT
Student peer assessment mark – DESIGN
Staff mark using peer criteria (check)
Level 2 descriptors: content
20, 19, 18 – Outstanding
Direct, comprehensive answer to the question set, using a wide range of examples, evidence and arguments. Demonstrates a
command of relevant facts and key concepts from the course. Excellent use of lecture and textbook material, supplemented by
confident, effective use of additional sources; perhaps some use of research literature; shows clear ability to develop
reasoned, sustained arguments. Discursive throughout, with clear evidence of critical ability. Fluent writing and structure, with
high quality presentation throughout.
17, 16, 15 – Very Good
Direct answer to the question set, using a range of information: solid factual basis supported by firm understanding of key
concepts. Confident, effective use of lecture and textbook material, supplemented by some use of additional sources (for
example, from newspapers, periodicals, judicious use of the internet, more specialist books) to develop reasoned arguments.
Discursive rather than descriptive, with some evidence of critical ability. Fluent writing and structure, with high quality
presentation throughout.
14, 13, 12 – Good
Direct but narrow answer to the question set, with competent use of basic lecture and set textbook information. Sound factual
base, with satisfactory understanding of key concepts from the course, but limited grasp of wider issues related to the question
set. Descriptive rather than discursive, with limited evidence of ability to develop reasoned arguments. Limited evidence of
reading beyond basic textbook material. Satisfactory organisation and presentation..
11, 10, 9 – Pass
Acceptable but inconsistent answer. Attempts to answer the question set, but lacks focus, with some content of limited relevance
and/or poor organisation of material. Limited demonstration of knowledge and understanding; sketchy use of lecture
material; perhaps some mistakes. Reliance on facts rather than argument, with little or no evidence of reading in support of
work. Poor quality presentation.
Criteria for peer assessment






Academic standard. Is the poster topic/case study focused and coherent? Is it relevant to the
wider theme of ‘environment and society’? How well does the poster use appropriate concepts
to frame its argument? How effective is the use of evidence to support arguments?
Originality of content. How much of this have you seen before? Did you learn something
today? Does the poster add clear value to what we said in the lectures or what is readily
available in textbooks? Does this poster add to what we might think of as popular stereotypes
or general knowledge?
Clarity of text. Can you read the text comfortably at a reasonable distance? Is the choice of
font(s), its size, the use of bold or italics effective? What about the line spacing or the contrast
between the text and the background?
Use of graphics. How well does the poster make use of pictures, charts or tables to impart
information, add variety and enhance its appeal?
Layout. Does the poster appear balanced? Can you follow the flow of the argument easily?
Are text boxes and graphics placed and spaced effectively? What about the use of colour, or
any features such as bullet points or arrows to improve the presentation?
Overall impact/appeal. Does the poster work for you? Is effective use made of the poster
format? Or is this just an essay printed out big on a single sheet? Has this got the ‘wow’
factor?
Peer form


What I liked most about this poster was...
To improve this poster I suggest...
What did we get?

See examples…
Click on
this link to
view full
size
poster
Click on
this link to
view full
size
poster
Click on
this link to
view full
size
poster
Click on
this link to
view full
size
poster
If you have difficulty viewing the posters, go to
http://www.abdn.ac.uk/cad/events-workshops/tfs/tfevent2013/teachingfellows-event-2013-ns/
Evaluation





Enjoyable social experience for students and staff
Impressive submissions
Rapid + enjoyable marking
Lots of feedback, quickly
Detailed + constructive – from staff and students
SCEFs


100% coursework popular!
How helpful... ?
 ~80% approval (Totally or 4) for balance of
assessment, explanation of assessment criteria
 ~70% approval (Totally or 4) for feedback
It covered a wide variety of topics and issues which different lectureres
(sic) brought different aspects and angles to light.
The fact it didn't have an exam at the end - plus the assessments were
very different and required the use of individual and group, computer
and literature analysis skills. This gives the course a greater appeal in my
opinion.
Feedback of assessments was generally very helpful and detailed.
Concerns #1



Complaints about group work?
 “group poster work, its hard to get everyone
together at the same time, not everyone pulls their
weight”
Complaints about group marks?
Complaints about peer marking?
Concerns #2


Over-generous peer marking inflates final grade?
Mean staff CAS = 15.39; mean peer mark = 14.09
Student + staff peer marks
Students
Staff



2012
14.09
14.09
Mean staff CAS 2012 = 15.39
Mean staff CAS 2013 = 14.88
Peer marks do not inflate grades!
2013
14.41
13.53
Conclusions





Not especially innovative or original...
Expedient
Efficient
Effective
Enjoyable