Comparative study on private and public peer evaluations on business students at the college level

Future Business graduates will enter a workplace where they will have to be accountable for their work and will be working in self-managed teams. They may be in situations where they will evaluate and propose new solutions to challenges and may have to work with peers who do not pull their own weight. As such, evaluation skills accompanied by strong communication skills will be crucial for their success. Peer feedback is a constructive learning tool for students to acquire deep learning, to become more engaged and committed to the task and course. However, when peer evaluations are completed privately and at the end of the term, these benefits are not obtained. In many Business courses, students do not obtain peer feedback promptly. Often, it is the teacher who explains what the peers said in their respective private peer evaluations (private PE). It is therefore difficult for the teacher to relate what happened in the group. Furthermore, there are no exchanges between the team members to explain or clarify points of view. Completing the peer evaluations (PE) in public can alleviate these points. In a public peer evaluation (public PE), team members openly discuss together each other’s contributions and complete one peer evaluation questionnaire together. Peer feedback is hence shared in a timely fashion, and members can discuss and justify their points, which build their confidence. When completed after key milestones in a group-based project, it allows the team to potentially improve its performance. This masters paper compares two peer evaluations: private and public peer evaluation. Fifty Business students from a Canadian English college participated in the study. It is an ethnically diverse sample comprised of 25 female and 25 male participants, in their first or third year of study in a technical marketing or accounting program. The research question is: Are there differences between the private PE versus public PE? Specifically, this study investigated the impact of several variables on the ways students reflect on the PE processes after working on two group-based assignments with the same team. The variables considered are gender, academic profiles, and year of study. The analysis covers differences in benefits and drawback identified in each PE, certain beliefs participants may have towards the PEs, PE preferences, impact on grades, and differences in self-assessment. This comparative case study examined the impact of repeating two different methods of PEs. The repeated measures allowed for a richer examination of the two forms of PEs. Students were randomly placed in small groups to work on two team-based projects with the same group. After the first assignment, each student completed a private PE. They then met with their respective group to complete the public PE. Both PEs were repeated at the end of the term, after the second group-based project. Various data collection tools were used. Each participant completed two private PE questionnaires and two public PE questionnaires with their teams. An exit survey was given at the end of the experiment. At the end of the term, participants’ grades for both team-based assignments and the course were collected. All data was analyzed in Excel. Overall gender base differences were minimal. Academic profiles offered meaningful differences. Students who had a weak academic profile were at an advantage in the public PE, and students with a strong academic profile were best served with the private PE. Throughout the various PEs, most average and strong students overvalued their self-assessments and their contribution to the team, however, the proportion of weak in academic profile students who undervalued their self-assessment increased from the first round of PEs to the second round of PEs The main benefit identified by the participants of the private PE is “honesty”, and the main drawback is the “difficulty to evaluate teammates”. As for the public PE, “feedback obtained” from teammates is the main advantage, while “potential conflict” the was main drawback. Participants found it challenging or unpleasant to write negative comments to justify peer evaluation scores. Positive comments often accompanied negative comments. The comments on the public PE questionnaire were short, demonstrating team consensus. On the private PE questionnaire, participants’ comments were a bit longer and focused on one or two evaluation criteria (quality of the work, attendance, attitude, etc.) To ensure the success of PE, the use of both forms of PEs may be beneficial. Evaluation is a difficult skill for students to master within the span of one course. Therefore, teachers must clearly explain the evaluation criteria, especially if the work to assess is complex. They should repeat the exercise, when possible for students to perfect the skills. Simplicity in the PE questionnaire will ensure students complete it in full and truthfully.

Name thesis:degree_name

M. Éd.

Level thesis:degree_level

Maîtrise

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

Enseignement au collégial

Grantor dc:publisher

Université de Sherbrooke

Year dc:date.issued

2017

Author dc:creator

• Cyrius, Fabienne

Advisor dc:contributor.advisor

• Charles, Elizabeth

• Business graduates
• Peer evaluation
• Techniques administratives
• Évaluation des pairs

Language dc:language.iso

en

Handle dc:identifier.uri

http://hdl.handle.net/11143/11608

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:usherbrooke.scholaris.ca:11143/11608