A case study on formative assessment -
The use of peer evaluation in primary
General Studies in a context of Hong Kong
進展性評估個案研究：
同儕評估在香港小學常識科的運用
CHUNG Tsz Wai Susanna
Diocesan Boys’ School Primary Division
Abstract
This case study explores the peer evaluation as a role of formative assessment in teaching General Studies (GS) in a primary Direct Subsided School in Hong Kong. GS students are expected to do their project at school and present their work at the later stage. Assessment covers the learning process as well as the project products. Four Grade 5 classes are selected for this study to address the following research questions: (1) How does peer evaluation work effectively? (2) In what ways do students benefit from peer evaluation? Observation, informal interviews and questionnaire are adopted to collect data. Data analysis reveals that teacher evaluation and peer evaluation are both important. Students can learn the good points from classmates through peer evaluation. Furthermore, by becoming more aware of the strengths and weaknesses of classmates, students become more reflective and know how to improve through peer evaluation.
Keywords
摘要
是項個案研究是探討進展性評估的其中一項──同儕評估在香港一間直資小學的常識科的 運用。學生在常識科中均需進行專題研習，然後向全班匯報。評估涵蓋了學習的過程及結 果，亦包含知識、態度及技能。研究以五年級的學生為對象，探討下列問題 : （1）如何 令同儕評估有效地進行？（2）學生從同儕評估中學習到什麼？數據反映學生眼中教師及同 儕評估同樣重要，學生能透過同儕評估學習彼此的優點；在掌握同學的優劣的同時，更有 效地作出自我檢視及改善。關鍵詞
同儕評估，從評估學習，自我檢視1. Introduction
This paper reports on a small-scale school-based action research that focuses on assessment for learning - peer evaluation. As indicated in the Reform Proposal for the Education System in Hong Kong (Education Commission, 2000), the education system is to be reformed to provide the most favourable environment for teaching and learning. Thus, students’ potentials can be fully realized and teachers can have more space to help students learn more effectively. As indicated in the in the new General Studies Curriculum Guide (2011), Project Learning as a powerful learning and teaching strategy, provides also the contexts for assessing students’ performance in different aspects of learning. Teachers, students, parents and others can all be made responsible for assessment at different stages of the project (Curriculum Development Council, 2011).
The school in the study is an EMI primary school, which has five periods in General Studies (GSI and II). There are two lessons in General Studies II that use Chinese as medium of instruction. Health and living, community and citizenship, and national identity and Chinese culture are the main strands in GS II. Project learning and peer evaluation are incorporated in the learning process in second semester. Students concentrate on the project design, explore it during lesson time, and then present their work at a latter stage, which usually involve peer evaluation in Grade 5 and Grade 6. However, the practice
and the format of peer evaluation depend on different teachers and time allowed. If this evaluation becomes more systematic and standard, it will be a good tool to enhance students’ learning.
Since peer evaluation is practised in the project of General Studies, how can it be more effective to enhance student learning? Can peer evaluation be used to create classroom cohesion and academic success for the collective as well as the individual? The main focus of this study is to explore more the practice of peer evaluation and what students can benefit through peer evaluation.
2. Literature Review
2.1 Formative Assessment
In 2001, the Curriculum Development Council Report on “Learning to Learn - The Way Forward in Curriculum Development” recommends that there should be a change in assessment practices and schools should put more emphasis on “Assessment for Learning” as an integral part of the learning, teaching and assessment cycle (Curriculum Development Council, 2001). Brown, Race and Rust (1995) claimed that the key to the use of assessment as an engine for learning is achieved by ensuring that each assignment let learners to receive detailed, positive and timely feedback on how to improve. Formative assessment was emphasized in order to promote learning and teaching effectiveness. Different types of formative assessment methods were introduced in the new General Studies Curriculum Guide (Curriculum Development Council, 2011).
Aims of assessment for students have been stated clearly. Students can understand their strengths and weaknesses in learning, what they should try to achieve next, and how best they might do this and improve their learning based on feedback from teachers and other assessors (Curriculum Development Council, 2002). Moreover, formative assessment, which focuses on the learning process and learning progress, can be used to collect evidence from time to time on student learning with a view to promoting better learning. Formative classroom assessment is learner-centered (Angelo & Cross, 1993; Boyd, 2001). Teachers need to connect formative assessment and feedback with learning to help students to know the standards they should attain, and give constructive suggestions on what to do next and how to do it.
2.2 Peer Evaluation
The new General Studies curriculum also stresses that teachers should use different modes of assessment and provides quality feedback to the students (Curriculum Development Council, 2011). Overreliance on pen and paper tests should be avoided, as they cannot adequately assess students’ performance over all the learning targets and objectives. Project learning as a powerful learning and teaching strategy, provides also the contexts for assessing students’ performance in different aspects of learning (Curriculum Development Council, 2011). Assessment should cover the learning process as well as the project products, including knowledge and skills.
Topping (2003) takes peer evaluation as a process, in which a group of students identify and observe the mastery or performance of particular aptitudes or skills applied by the group after training or learning. Students explicitly or implicitly hold themselves mutually responsible for the successful completion of the evaluation exercise. Peer assessment, in which students comment on and judge their colleagues work, has a vital role to play in formative assessment. The new General Studies curriculum (Curriculum Development Council, 2011) claim peer assessment can be introduced for students to provide feedback and communicate with their peers about each other’s work, thus helping to cultivate a collaborative learning culture. Peer and self evaluation have always existed informally as students constantly compare their own performance with those of their classmates (Race, Brown & Smith, 2005). Peer and self assessment are skills that should benefit students throughout their studies and professional life in the higher education (Brown, Rust & Gibbs, 1994). By becoming aware of others performance, students will reflect on their own. Thus, peer assessment naturally helps self-assessment. Hoping to find peer evaluation also benefits primary school students in this study.
A variety of positive feedback of peer evaluation has been documented and it is generally believed that peer evaluation can promote critical thinking (Brown, Bull, & Pendlebury, 1997), they should become less reliant on teachers for guidance and more able to know how to direct their own learning. Peer evaluation also enhance learning and critical understanding of evaluation criteria and the knowledge gap, develop “social and communication skills, negotiation and diplomacy, and useful transferable skills like giving and handling criticism, self-justification and assertion” (Topping, 2003, p. 57), rather than simply seeing a mark.
3.1 The Educational Setting and Research Questions
Peer evaluation is a normal practice in my school in subjects like Maths, English and General Studies. This assessment mode always goes with project learning in Grade 4-6. Students also practise the peer evaluation in the Inquiry-based Learning week every year. My students are familiar with the practice of peer evaluation. However, the form of peer assessment varies according to grades and teachers’ requirement. Each group gives the feedback to others formally or informally. Though modification has been made every year, it is various with different teachers.
In this study, the following questions are to be examined: 1. How does peer evaluation work effectively?
2. What is the difference between peer evaluation on one group and on all groups? 3. What is the difference between peer evaluation on focus items and on all items? 4. In what ways do students benefit from peer evaluation?
There should have some difference if students assess one group and every group because of the level of concentration and time using. Therefore, it is important to find out these differences so that further amendment can be made.
This study was carried out in four G5 classes in a Hong Kong primary school from December 2009 to March 2010. Students did their project in General Studies at school in Term 2 and presented their work at the later stage. Other classmates had to evaluate their performance. Questionnaires and informal interviews were given to collect students’ feedback. The original framework of this study was listed in Table 1:
Table 1: No. of group and evaluate items of each class
Peer evaluation 5D 5J 5P 5S No. of group All groups All groups One group One group Evaluate items All items Focus items All items Focus items
3.2 Pre-task Interview and Restructure the Setting
Before students’ presentation, 40 students (10 students per class) were interviewed with the purpose that to restructure our framework and address the concerns before the study. The following questions were asked:
1. Do you think peer evaluation is important?
2. Do you think our boys are equipped to do peer evaluation? 3. Do you think the marks on peer evaluation should be counted?
4. What do you prefer? Peer evaluation focus on one group only or all groups? 5. What evaluation items should be included?
According to the interviews, it was found that students like peer evaluation if all students were objective and fair; marks would not be affected; prefer to evaluate every group; students could focus on the performance of classmates and they could learn and improve. Since students preferred to evaluate every group instead of focusing on one group, one proposed question “What is the difference between peer evaluation on one group and on all groups?” was cancelled.
3.3 Data Collection
At the final stage of project learning, G5 students had to present their project in group during 23 Feb to 3 March (Table 2). Two to three lessons were needed for the presentation since we could not finish the presentation within one lesson. The Peer Evaluation Form (Appendix 1) was given to each student. The boys in 5D and 5P had to evaluate all items for every group whereas 5J and 5S just focused on one item (Content / Presentation skills / Cooperation and Interaction). Teachers assigned the focus item for each group before their presentations. In the first lesson the students were told that they would do peer evaluation for a presentation, teacher uses one group as demonstration to let students familiar with both formats before the actual practice: students had to practice evaluate all items and focus items.
Table 2: The schedule of each class in the peer evaluation
Peer evaluation 5D 5J 5P 5S No. of group All groups All groups All groups All groups
Evaluate items All items Focus items* All items Focus items*
Students’
suggestions a. Contentb. Presentation skills c1. Cooperation c2. Interaction a. Content b. Presentation skills c1. Cooperation c2. Interaction a. Content b. Presentation skills c1. Cooperation c2. Interaction a. Content b. Presentation skills c1. Cooperation c2. Interaction Presentation and
Peer Evaluation 23 Feb to 3 March 23 Feb to 3 March 23 Feb to 3 March 23 Feb to 3 March
* Group 1 and 4 were assigned to assess the Content of every group;
Group 2 and 5 were assigned to assess the Presentation Skills of every group;
Group 3 and 6 were assigned to assess the Cooperation and Interaction of every group. Once the students had completed their presentations and their peer evaluations, they were asked to complete a simple questionnaire (Peer Evaluation), which was designed to record their feelings and feedback towards the evaluation process. The Evaluation Form (Appendix 2) is divided into three parts: Overall comment on peer evaluation (9 items), format of peer evaluation (3 items for A or B) and the items of peer evaluation (1 item). There is a 4-point scale for each item (1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-agree and 4-strongly agree). The higher average implies the strongest level of agreement. G5 peer evaluation completed in the early March (before the second assessment) and the Evaluation Form for the Peer Evaluation were collected. Though there were 150 students in G5, only 137 Evaluation Forms were collected for some students were absent and did not complete the whole peer evaluation process.
4. Findings and Discussions
4.1 The effectiveness of peer evaluation
After analyzing the data for peer evaluation form (Appendix 3 and 4), there are 12 items which average is above 3. Item 9 (It is a waste of time if we have peer evaluation) of the part is an exceptional case. 80.3% students disagree with it and its average (1.87) is extremely low which implies students do think that peer evaluation does not waste time though its process may be quite long.
As for the effectiveness of peer evaluation, items in Appendix 4, e.g. “Teacher evaluation and peer evaluation both are important.” and “I can learn the good points from my classmates through peer evaluation”, both have the strongest agreement (84.7% or above) and highest average (3.18 or above), which indicates peer evaluation plays an important role. Peer evaluation also means that students need to listen to classmates which keeps them involved at all times. As for mark counting, students believe that peer evaluation is more effective if my classmates are fair and objective (84.7% agree, average 3.16) and they prefer not to count any marks (78.1% agree, average 3.17) at this stage. At a latter stage if students are familiar with the system, with a class of assessors, assuming that they are capable of performing such a role, the assessment should be fairer.
Moreover, students become more reflective of their own. About 79.6% students agree that they know “… how to improve through peer evaluation” (average 3.04) and “… not to make the same mistakes as my classmates through peer evaluation” (average 3.03). By doing peer evaluation, students ask classmates informally and also give advice. This experience should enhance their leadership abilities.
Moreover, 74.5% students agree they can apply the good points from their classmates through peer evaluation. Students should be asking themselves why they are better and then endeavour to emulate them. As students develop their critical faculties they should become less reliant on teachers for guidance and more able to know direct their own learning (Brown, et al.,1994). However, further exploration is needed to examine what specific items students can learn in the second loop of study.
4.2 The difference between peer evaluation on focus items and on all items
There are two choices for students to choose: either “All items are assessed” or “Only one focus item is assessed for every group”. 98 students (71.5%) prefer to assess all items whereas 39 students (28.5%) like to assess on focus items. 98 students like to assess all items for they can understand the overall performance of each group (93 students agree with average 3.34) and assess the performance of classmates fairly and objectively (88 students agree with average 3.23). Moreover, 87 students believe they participate more in the classroom activities.
Comparatively speaking, 39 students prefer to assess one focus item on each group. They can learn and improve more on the focus item (35 students agree with average 3.20) and concentrate more on the focus item of each group (35 students agree with average 3.11). However, in comparing the time in the effectiveness of peer assessment, the data is not so apparent.
4.3 Obstacles and Challenges
Since very little has been done in peer evaluation before this study, the following problems are encountered: (1) the unavailability of an effective evaluation form, and (2) the time allocation in peer evaluation. It is difficult to find an effective evaluation form for this study, the focus of this study is to explore the effectiveness of peer evaluation in this context, school-based evaluation form is more important than any forms with high validity and reliability, so it is preferable to design the evaluation form and collect the relevant data.
The time allocation is also a quite difficult task. Students need to present in groups as scheduled. Each group is assigned to present their work on assigned date. They need to dress up before the lesson if necessary. If each group is given 2 minutes for preparation and 8 minutes for presentation, one GS II lesson (35 minutes) can only have 3 groups to present at most. The whole presentation process cannot be completed within one week – not good for peer evaluation for it lasts for such a long period. Since students complete the peer evaluation group by group, thus do not affect the score of each group but the split affect the continuity of the process.
4.4 Further Elaboration
This practice does not mark an end. In fact it just starts the beginning of more exploration in peer evaluation. The peer evaluation in GS II can be revised to be more student-oriented. Moreover, the same group of boys proceeds to G6 and they have peer evaluation in Maths and Inquiry-based Learning in May and June 2011, this study can be elaborated more. It is curious to find out if the boys apply the skills in what they have learnt. Follow-up informal interviews were conducted with a couple of students, and some key points are focused as below (Appendix 5):
1. The boys can apply the skills we learnt in G5 (peer evaluation) in various subjects (Maths & Inquiry Based Learning);
2. Classmates learn the strengths and weaknesses of one another;
3. The content should be comprehensive and persuasive. Systematic in presentation. Good interaction with the audiences;
4. Boys can be more cooperative which enhances the team spirit;
5. To be more objective and fair in evaluating the performance without any bias; 6. Learn the good points and apply them. Avoid making the same mistakes and think
of the ways for improvement;
7. Enhance critical thinking and analysis;
8. Teacher can use the score and comments for reference and modify them before making the final judgment;
9. Precious, Efficient, Student’s view, Listen and judge carefully.
It appears that students learn and apply the skills spontaneously, which is quite encouraging. Moreover, students’ major concern is primarily on improving their work in the future with instructive comments. Training students how to assess students can be implemented in the critical training programme in order to make peer evaluation more effective.
5. Conclusions
Since this study is small-scaled and generalization is quite limited, it should be noted that this paper is concerned with one grade, and the findings might be different with other students. From my point of view, the impression of teacher and students are quite positive. Teachers do not play a dominant role in assessing students’ performance, since this role has been shared among students, it is possible for teachers to become aware of our own evaluation style.
Besides, according to the collected data in this study, students’ apparent attitude proves that peer evaluation can help in the assessment for learning. Students’ feedback in peer evaluation is very encouraging. Their judgment of good performance is further enhanced through learning the good points from peers and avoiding making the same mistakes. Their eagerness of understanding the overall performance of peers in a fairly and objective manners encourages teachers to explore the peer evaluation more. More interaction within the lesson can be seen for students learn to give positive feedback.
Both formats in the peer assessment have the merit, the peer evaluation can be divided into 2 phases if it is possible: students need to assess one focus items on each group in the first phase, once they get familiar in the practice and learn the assessing skills, they can go to the second phase- assess all items. Maybe this practice can be implemented in the second loop of the study.
Given the above mentioned positive results obtained from students, further investigations and studies needs to be undertaken to divulge students’ needs as peer evaluators. Studies could also be broadened to include participation by other subjects (e.g. General Studies I and Maths) which use project learning as formative assessment. A systematic data collection should be conducted besides informal interviews.
References
Angelo, T. A. & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques. San Francisco: Josses-Bass Publishers.
Boyd, B. L. (2001). Formative classroom assessment: learner focused. The Agricultural
Education Magazine, March/April 2001, Proudest Company.
Brown, S., Rust, C., & Gibbs, G. (1994). Diversifying Assessment 5: Involving students
Section 5: Involving students in the assessment process. Retrieved October 20, 2011,
from: http://www.city.londonmet.ac.uk/deliberations/ocsd-pubs/div-ass.html.
Brown, S., Race, P., & Rust, C. (1995). Using and experiencing assessment. In P. Knight (Ed.), Assessment for learning in higher education. London: Kogan Page.
Brown, G., Bull, J., & Pendlebury, M (1997). Assessing student learning in higher
education. London: Routledge.
Curriculum Development Council. (2001). Learning to Learn - The Way Forward in
Curriculum. Retrieved September 8, 2011, from: http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.
aspx?langno=1&nodeID=2877.
Curriculum Development Council. (2002). Basic Education Curriculum Guide: Building
on Strengths (Primary 1 – Secondary 3). Hong Kong: HKSAR Government.
Curriculum Development Council. (2011). General Studies for Primary Schools
Curriculum Guide (Primary 1 – Primary 6). Hong Kong: HKSAR Government.
Education Commission. (2000). Reform Proposal for the Education System in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: HKSAR Government.
Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Luoma, S. (2005). Assessing speaking skills. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Race, P., Brown, S., & Smith, B. (2005). 500 Tipson Assessment (2nd edition). Oxon:
Routledge Falmer.
Strom, P. S., Strom, R. D., & Moore, E. G. (1999). Peer and self-evaluation of teamwork skills. Journal of Adolescence, 22, 539-553.
Topping, K. (2003). Self and peer assessment in school and university: reliability, validity and utility. In M. Segers, F. Dochy & E. Casacallar (Eds.), Optimising new modes
of assessment: In search of qualities and standards (pp. 55-87). London: Kluwer
Appendix 1
Diocesan Boys’ School Primary Division
G5 General Studies II Project Learning Peer Evaluation Form
Class: ____________ Name: _________________________( ) Group: ___________ Performance: Please circle the number of stars in each item.Items for Peer Evaluation 評估細項 Group ( )
Content 內容
Provide sufficient information 資料清楚明確 ☆ ☆ ☆ Pictures/captions are clear 圖文搭配得當 / 版面編排美觀 ☆ ☆ ☆ Clear and attractive layout 創意的表現具有特色 ☆ ☆ ☆ A clear and concise content 能淺顯易懂的讓人了解 ☆ ☆ ☆ Content and model are coherent 內容能配合模型 或 服裝 的介紹 ☆ ☆ ☆
Presentation 發表與呈現
Good introduction and conclusion 表達組織 ( 引題及完結 ) 有條理 ☆ ☆ ☆ Clear and organized structure 發表有條理 / 層次分明 ☆ ☆ ☆ Clear and loud voice 語調清晰，快慢適中 ☆ ☆ ☆ Fluency 語詞使用的正確性及流暢性 ☆ ☆ ☆
Cooperation 小組合作 ☆ ☆ ☆
Good division of work 組員一起參與，共同分工合作學習 ☆ ☆ ☆ Good time management 各組員的時間分配得宜 ☆ ☆ ☆ Good cooperation 組員能各展所長，互補不足 ☆ ☆ ☆
Interaction 互動 ☆ ☆ ☆
Meaningful activities 能透過活動與同學互動 ☆ ☆ ☆ Answer questions accurately 有條理地回答同學的問題 ☆ ☆ ☆ Good interaction 同學彼此互動，增添氣氛 ☆ ☆ ☆ Total 45 ☆ 合計 (45 ☆)
Appendix 2
Diocesan Boys’
School Primary Division
Evaluation Form for
Peer
Evaluation
同儕評估意見表
Please circle the right number:
評估細項
Overall comment on peer
evaluation 非常不同意 Str ongly Disagr ee 不同意 Disagr ee 同意 Agr ee 非常同意 Str ongly Agr ee 1. 在評估過程中 ，教師及 同儕的評估同樣重要
Teacher evaluation and peer evaluation both are important.
1 2 3 4 2. 同儕評估宜不涉及分數
Peer evaluation do not count any marks.
1 2 3 4 3. 同學公正及客觀的態度 能讓同儕評估發揮得宜
Peer evaluation is more ef
fective if my
classmates are fair and objective.
1 2 3 4 4. 同儕評估對你有幫助
Peer evaluation help me a lot.
1 2 3 4 5. 同儕評估能讓你學習同 學的優點
I can learn the good points from my classmates through peer evaluation.
1 2 3 4 6. 同儕評估能讓你運用同 學的優點
I can apply the good points from my classmates through peer evaluation.
1 2 3 4 7. 同儕評估能客觀地了解 可改善的地方
I know how to improve through peer evaluation.
1 2 3 4 8. 同儕評估能讓你避免犯 同學的錯誤
I know not to make the same mistakes as my classmates through peer evaluation.
1 2 3 4 9. 同儕評估浪費時間
It is a waste of time if we have peer evaluation.
1
2
3
同儕評估形式
只可選答
(A)
或
(B)
The format for
peer evaluation (choose A or B) (A ) 每組評估各組的整體表現 (內 容/發 表/小 組 合 作/互 動) (A) All items a re assessed. 1. 能了解各組的整體表現 1.
Understand the overall performance of each group.
1 2 3 4 2. 能積極參與課堂活動 2.
Participate more in the classroom activities.
1 2 3 4 3. 能公正及客觀地學習同學的優劣 3.
Assess the performance of classmates fairly and objectively
. 1 2 3 4 4. 其他 : ( 請註明 ) 4.
Others: (please specify)
(B ) 每一組只評估各組的其中一項表現 ( 只評估各組的內容 ) (B)
Only one focus item is as
sessed for every group.
1.
能集中了解各組的某一項表現
1.
Concentrate more on the focus item of each group.
1 2 3 4 2. 能有效地學習及改善自己某一項表現 2.
Learn and improve more on the focus item.
1 2 3 4 3. 時間有限 ，未能有效評估同學各項表 現 3.
Cannot assess the performance ef
fectively due to the
shortage of time. 1 2 3 4 4. 其他 : ( 請註明 ) 4.
Others: (please specify)
同儕評估項目
The items for
peer evaluation 1. 評估各組的表現足夠 (內 容/發 表/小 組 合 作/互 動)
Items are enough for evaluation. Content / Presentation skills / Cooperation and Interaction
1 2 3 4 2. 建議增加 / 刪減 :
Suggestions: add / delete
原因 : Reason(s): 評語︰值得讚賞 / 宜加改善 Suggestions:
Appendix 3
Diocesan Boys’
School Primary Division
Peer
Evaluation Form
同儕評估意見表
(Data)
評估細項 Evaluation items Average 1 2 3 4 Total 1. 在評估過程中 ，教師及同儕的評估 同樣重要 Teacher evaluation and peer evaluation both are important. 3.18 5 8 82 42 137 2. 同儕評估宜不涉及分數 Peer evaluation do not count any marks. 3.17 9 21 45 62 137 3. 同學公正及客觀的態度能讓同儕評 估發揮得宜 Peer evaluation is more effective if my classmates are fair and objective. 3.16 10 11 63 53 137 4. 同儕評估對你有幫助 Peer evaluation help me a lot. 2.90 15 23 60 39 137 5. 同儕評估能讓你學習同學的優點 I can learn the good points from my classmates through peer evaluation. 3.19 7 14 62 54 137 6. 同儕評估能讓你運用同學的優點 I can apply the good points from my classmates through peer evaluation. 2.99 11 24 58 44 137 7. 同儕評估能客觀地了解可改善的地 方 I know how to improve through peer evaluation. 3.04 11 17 64 45 137 8. 同儕評估能讓你避免犯同學的錯誤 I know not to make the same mistakes as my classmates through peer evaluation. 3.03 11 22 56 48 137 9. 同儕評估浪費時間 It is a waste of time if we have peer evaluation. 1.87 60 50 12 15 137同儕評估形式
只可選答
(A)
或
(B)
The format for
peer evaluation (choose A or B) Average 1 2 3 4 Total (A ) 每組評估各組的整體表現 (內 容/發 表/小 組 合 作/互 動) (A) All items a re assessed. 1. 能了解各組的整體表現 1.
Understand the overall performance of each group.
3.34 0 5 55 38 98 2. 能積極參與課堂活動 2.
Participate more in the classroom activities.
3.18 1 10 57 30 98 3. 能公正及客觀地學習同學的優劣 3.
Assess the performance of classmates fairly and objectively
. 3.23 3 7 52 36 98 4. 其他 : ( 請註明 ) 4.
Others: (please specify)
--0 0 0 0 0 (B ) 每一組只評估各組的其中一項表現 ( 只評估各組的內容 ) (B)
Only one focus item is as
sessed
for every group.
1.
能集中了解各組的某一項表現
1.
Concentrate more on the focus item of each group.
3.1 1 2 2 23 12 39 2. 能有效地學習及改善自己某一項表 現 2.
Learn and improve more on the focus item.
3.20 2 2 20 15 39 3. 時 間 有 限 ， 未 能 有 效 評 估 同 學 各 項 表現 3.
Cannot assess the performance effectively due to the shortage of time.
2.68 6 13 7 13 39 4. 其他 : ( 請註明 ) 4.
Others: (please specify)
--0 0 0 0 0 同儕評估項目
The items for
peer evaluation 1. 評估各組的表現足夠 (內 容/發 表/小 組 合 作/互 動)
Items are enough for evaluation. Content / Presentation skills / Cooperation and Interaction
3.33 5 2 73 57 137 2. 建議增加 / 刪減 :
Suggestions: add / delete
0 0 0 0 0 原因 : Reason(s):
Appendix 4
Diocesan Boys’
School Primary Division
Peer
Evaluation Form
同儕評估意見表
(Data)
評估細項 Evaluation items Average 1 2 3 4 Total 1. 在評估過程中 ，教師及同 儕的評估同樣重要 Teacher evaluation and peer evaluation both are important. 3.18 3.6% 5.8% 59.9% 30.7% 137 2. 同儕評估宜不涉及分數 Pe er e va lu at io n do n ot c ou nt a ny marks. 3.17 6.6% 15.3% 32.8% 45.3% 137 3. 同 學 公 正 及 客 觀 的 態 度 能 讓同儕評估發揮得宜 Peer evaluation is more effective if my classmates are fair and objective. 3.16 7.3% 8.0% 46.0% 38.7% 137 4. 同儕評估對你有幫助 Peer evaluation help me a lot. 2.90 10.9% 16.8% 43.8% 28.5% 137 5. 同 儕 評 估 能 讓 你 學 習 同 學 的優點 I can learn the good points from my classmates through peer evaluation. 3.19 5.1% 10.2% 45.3% 39.4% 137 6. 同 儕 評 估 能 讓 你 運 用 同 學 的優點 I can apply the good points from my classmates through peer evaluation. 2.99 8.0% 17.5% 42.3% 32.1% 137 7. 同 儕 評 估 能 客 觀 地 了 解 可 改善的地方 I know how to improve through peer evaluation. 3.04 8.0% 12.4% 46.7% 32.8% 137 8. 同 儕 評 估 能 讓 你 避 免 犯 同 學的錯誤 I know not to make the same mistakes as my classmates through peer evaluation. 3.03 8.0% 16.1% 40.9% 35.0% 137 9. 同儕評估浪費時間 It i s a wa st e of t im e if w e ha ve peer evaluation. 1.87 43.8% 36.5% 8.8% 10.9% 137同儕評估形式
只可選答
(A)
或
(B)
The format for
peer evaluation (choose A or B) Average 1 2 3 4 Total (A ) 每組評估各組的整體表現 (內 容/發 表/小 組 合 作/互 動) (A) All items a re assessed. 1. 能了解各組的整體表現 1.
Understand the overall performance of each group.
3.34 0.0% 5.1% 56.1% 38.8% 98 2. 能積極參與課堂活動 2.
Participate more in the classroom activities.
3.18 1.0% 10.2% 58.2% 30.6% 98 3. 能公正及客觀地學習同學的優劣 3.
Assess the performance of cla
ssm at es fa irl y a nd obj ec tive ly . 3.23 3.1% 7.1% 53.1% 36.7% 98 4. 其他 : ( 請註明 ) 4.
Others: (please specify)
--0 0 0 0 0 (B ) 每一組只評估各組的其中一項表 現 ( 只評估各組的內容 ) (B )
Only one focus item is assessed for every group.
1.
能集中了解各組的某一項表現
1.
Concentrate more on the focus item of each group.
3.1 1 5.1% 5.1% 59.0% 30.8% 39 2. 能有效地學習及改善自己某一項表 現 2.
Learn and improve more on the focus item.
3.20 5.1% 5.1% 51.3% 38.5% 39 3. 時間有限 ，未能有效評估同學各項 表現 3.
Cannot assess the performance effectively due to the shortage of time.
2.68 15.4% 33.3% 17.9% 33.3% 39 4. 其他 : ( 請註明 ) 4.
Others: (please specify)
--0 0 0 0 0 同儕評估項目
The items for
peer evaluation 1. 評估各組的表現足夠 (內 容/發 表/小 組 合 作/互 動)
Items are enough for evaluation. Content / Presentation skills / Cooperation and Interaction
3.33 3.6% 1.5% 53.3% 41.6% 137 2. 建議增加 / 刪減 :
Suggestions: add / delete
0 0 0 0 0 原因 : Reason(s):
Appendix 5
Student A:
Student C:
Student D:
