Winning the crowd vote

Approaches to peer assessment in undergraduate

popular music performance

Sheffield Hallam University

Research Forum

29th April 2002

Mark Pulman

Winning the crowd vote

Approaches to peer assessment in undergraduate popular music performance

•Peer assessment of group musical performance

•Introducing peer assessment on BA (Popular Music Studies) at Barnsley College

•The research project

•Comments, questions, discussion

Perceived benefits to students:

Improvements across a range of skills,e.g: transferable,listening,group-work

Feedback was speedy, effective and delivered over large groups of students

Learning behaviour was moderated and performance improved

Motivation and enthusiasm increased

Student ownership of the assessment process

Self-confidence, understanding, reflection and intellectual development

Perceived benefits to staff:

Increased opportunities to monitor student progress

Improvements to the marking systems

Improved relationships with students

Peer Assessment in educational literature…

• the character of the medium

• the desirability of using peer assessment to identify individual contributions to group work• the desirability of involving students in the ownership of the assessment process•the potential for improving students’ learning behaviour

•the consistency of assessment agreements

•the evidence from other curriculum areas

Why use peer assessment in popular music music group performance?

•Peer assessment is best introduced at or near the beginning of the students’ course, i.e., in their first year.

•Ensure that marks which may be awarded through peer assessment are not given an exaggerated weighting within the total marking scheme., particularly if the peer-assessed element counts significantly towards a student’s final degree classification.

•Inform students of the process

•Use a moderation procedure

•Introduce it gradually

Introducing peer assessment onto our performance modules………… using ‘best practice’

Approaches to Peer Assessment

‘Inter-Peer’ Assessment

•students assess other students

‘Intra-Peer’ Assessment

•students assess other students with whom they have been working

Research Questions

•What is the desirability of identifying individual contributions to collaborative group work?

•What changes in learning behaviour can be identified in groups who are subject to peer group assessment?

•To what extent are inter-peer assessmentsof band performances consistent?

2000-2001 Module % Assignment summary Assessment methods

Induction Project

Advisory mark given

A cover version of any song

Tutor assessed

Themed set 25% A 3-song themed and segued set performed at a local pub

Inter-peer assessment by BA3

Vocal harmony

25% The performance of a song arranged for at least 3 vocalists

Tutor assessedIntra-peer assessment within each band

Busking 25% Provide busking entertainment for Barnsley Spring Festival

Tutor assessed

Tribute night

25% Create a 3-song tribute act to an artist or band

Inter-peer assessed by BA2Intra-peer assessed within each band

  

Extended Degree Assessment Plan 2000-01 &2001-02

Entertainment valueEnthusiasm

Flow and continuityMusicality

PresentationProfessionalism

TightnessAudience communication

Assessment Criteria generated by BA1

(for December 2000 Assignment 2 ‘Christmas Party’)

Band Panel A Mark Tutor Mark Agreed Mark

1 14 13 14

2 9 11 9

3 8 10 8

4 15 14 15

5 5 7 5

6 8 10 8

  Panel B Mark Tutor Mark Agreed Mark

7 12 12 12

8 10 9 10

9 8 10 8

10 11 11 11

11 15 15 15

12 10 9 10

 

Comparison between Tutor and Peer Panel marks BA1 Assignment 2 Dec 2000

Did everyone contribute equally? If so, each member of the group should be given 25% if the group is a four-piece (or 20%each if the group is a five-piece, etc) If two members of the group contributed significantly more than their colleagues, the distribution of percentages might reflect this in the following allocation: 15 +15 +35 +35.

Allocate a mark for each member of the group. Ensure that marks total 100%

Group members Assessment %

1(self)___________________________ ________

2_______________________________ ________

3_______________________________ _________

Group members Assessment %

4______________________________ ________

5______________________________ ________

6______________________________ ________

Explain and justify your mark for each band member:

1(self)___________________________________________________________________________________________

2_______________________________________________________________________________________________3_______________________________________________________________________________________________

4_______________________________________________________________________________________________

5_______________________________________________________________________________________________

6_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Report completed by_________________________ Course__________________________ Date___________

Intra-peer Assessment form

Band 1: Overall group mark awarded by tutor = 5/16 

  A B C D Intra-Peer % 

% expressed as a proportion of thegroup mark (5)

Individual student mark (rounded)

Student A 25 25 25 30 105 5.25 5

Student B 30 25 25 30 110 5.25 5

Student C 25 25 25 30 105 5.50 6

Student D 20 25 25 10 80 4.00 4

Totals 100 100 100 100       

Intra-peer assessment marks for BA Extended Degree Assignment 2 (March2001)

Concerns about the effects of intra-peer assessment upon a group….

•Ethics

•Confidentiality

•How is feedback to be given?

•Will it damage group cohesion?

Bands who distribute their individual assessments equally tend to receive better band marks

Band Mark/16

Distribution Band Mark/16

Distribution

Band A 6 Equal Band I 15 Equal

Band B 9 Equal Band E 14 Equal

Band C 12 Unequal Band F 12 Unequal

Band K 15 Equal Band L 9 Unequal

Band G 9 Unequal Band H 11 Equal

Band J 14 Equal Band D 13 Equal

Successful bands stick together! 

Band Mark/16

Personnel changes

Band Mark/16

Personnel changes

Band 1 10 2 changes from 5

Band 7 10 1 change from 5

Band 2 10 All 5 unchanged Band 8 9 All 5 unchanged

Band 3 7 All 5 split up Band 9 4 1 change from 5

Band 4 9 All 5 unchanged Band 10 8 All 5 unchanged

Band 5 11 2 changes from 5 Band 11 7 3 changes from 5

Band 6 13 All 5 unchanged Band 12 4 All 4 split up

The responses to peer assessment approaches in popular music group performance has been positive

No resistance was to its introduction was encountered

There was a high consistency of agreement between student panel marks and those of the tutors

The intra-peer assessment method was effective in terms of identifying the individual contributions to the group and there was evidence that group working skills improved during the duration of the BA1 programme

Implementing intra-peer assessment can require extra care and feedback can pose ethical problems

A few panel students questioned whether they should be awarding marks as well as providing feedback

Summary of findings………….

NAME: Eric Clapton

Name the THREE most important Qualities that you all agree on as being the most important to successful rehearsing of your group. Identify THREE more Personal Strengths that are specific to you.Name also the opposite or negative side of each.

 

1 GROUP QUALITY Attendance - (Lack of attendance)

2 GROUP QUALITY Listening skills - (ignorance)

3 GROUP QUALITY Enthusiasm - (apathy)

4 PERSONAL STRENGTH Organisation - (disorganised)

5 PERSONAL STRENGTH Social skills - (unsociable)

6 PERSONAL STRENGTH Patience - (intolerance)

 

Intra-peer Group Qualities and Personal Attributes

Peer panel students stated that acting as assessors has improved their own approaches to performing

Peer panel students approached the assessments with responsibility and integrity

More input into preparing panel students and equipping them with the skills for assessing in advance of the performances is required

Intra-peer assessment may require additional assessment criteria that is generated by each particular student

Discussion between student bands and peer panels improves the understanding of the assessment criteria

Summary of findings……continued

‘…we see the other side…it made me more aware of what I am going to do for my performance…’

‘…it took a lot of intimidation out of the process…’

‘ …I just saw it as ….assessors are human…they are there just to do the job….the performers get the criteria…the assessors get the criteria ..so everyone should know what they have to achieve…and sometimes I kind of lose sight of that…’

What do students think…………….

Intra-peer Assessment FormRate each person on a 1-4 scale

Group Qualities Personal Strengths

Attendance

(lack of)

Listening S

kills(Ignorance)

Enthusiasm

(apathy)

Organisation

(disorganised)

Social S

kills(unsociable)

Patience

(intolerance)

Leadership

(shy)

Versatility

(narrow-m

inded)

Experience

(inexperience)

Willingness to

comprom

ise(unw

illingness)

TK 4 3 3 N/A N/A 3 4 3 N/A N/A

DN 2 3 2 N/A 1 N/A 2 N/A N/A 3

HP 1 3 2 N/A N/A 3 N/A 2 N/A 2

LA 3 3 3 4 3 N/A N/A N/A 3 N/A

Name: LA Date: 14th Dec 2001 Band Name: The Rejects

End of presentation

Thank you

Any questions, please?