Jak cytować
Abstrakt
In the context of European Higher Education, universities are highly adopting innovative curricula focused on students acquisition of skills and competences needed for the further career development of the 21st century graduates. Particularly, Universitat Politécnica de Valencia (UPV) (Spain), has launched an institutional Project on transversal skills UPV (i.e. skills acquired by the UPV graduates). This project is supported by the strategic plan UPV2020. Its main goal is to accredit, by using rubrics, 13 transversal skills of any graduate from the Universitat Politècnica de València.
Within this paper, we work on one of the 13 transversal skills, particularly, critical thinking. Our aim is not just to assess the level of acquisition of this skill, but also to improve students’ performance. In so doing, an innovative computerbased tool is introduced based in ‘paired peer ranking’. It is also shown that peer assessment strengthens students skills, encourages participation, promotes academic excellence, and hence increases students’ performance, offers higher feed back, fosters attendance, and promotes greater accountability on the part of the students.
Bibliografia
EHEA, Bologna-process European Higher Education Area. History, 2014.
Reinalda B. and Publishers B.B.: The Bologna Process – Harmonizing Europe’s Higher Education, 2005.
ICE, Proyecto de competencias transversalesUPV. Rúbricas, 2015.
Grao J., Carot J.M., Mora J.G., Ochoa C., Pérez P.J., Uriarte C. and Vila L.E.: Aportación de la universidad y de la experiencia laboral al desarrollo de competencias en la juventud egresada, Investig. Econ. la Educ., Vol. 6, No. 6, pp. 563-576, 2011.
Anderson R.S.: Why talk about different ways to grade? The shift from traditional assessment to alternative assessment, New Dir. Teach. Learn., Vol. 74, pp. 5-16, 1998.
Christoforou A.P. and Yigit A.S.: Improving teaching and learning in engineering education through a continuous assessment process, Eur. J. Eng. Educ., Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 105-116, 2008.
Reiter H.I., Eva K.W., Hatala R.M. and Norman G.R.: Self and peer assessment in tutorials: application of a relative-ranking model., Acad. Med., Vol. 77, No. 11, pp. 1134-1139, 2002.
Nicol D.J. and Macfarlane-Dick D.: Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice, Stud. High. Educ., Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 199-218, 2006.
Higgins M. and Grant F.: Formative Assessment: Balancing Educational Effectiveness and Resource Efficiency, Education, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 4-24, 2010.
Vickerman P.: Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: an attempt to deepen learning?, Assess. Eval. High. Educ., Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 221-230, 2009.
Ohland M.W., Loughry M.L., Woehr D.J., Bullard L.G., Felder R.M., Finelli C.J., Layton R.A., Pomeranz H.R. and Schmucker D.G.: The Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Development of a Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale for Self- and Peer Evaluation, Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ., Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 609-631, 2012.
Sluijsmans D., Dochy F. and Moerkerke G.: Creating a learning environment by using self-, peer-and co-assessment, Learn. Environ. Res., pp. 293-319, 1998.
Tu Y. and Lu M.: Peer-and-Self Assessment to Reveal the Ranking of Each Individual’s Contribution to a Group Project., J. Inf. Syst. Educ., Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 197-205, 2005.
Lai C.-L. and Hwang G.-J.: An interactive peer-assessment criteria development approach to improving students’ art design performance using handheld devices, Comput. Educ., Vol. 85, pp. 149-159, 2015.
Fürnkranz J. and Hüllermeier E. (Eds.): Preference Learning. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.
Kadziński M., Słowiński R. and Greco S.: Multiple criteria ranking and choice with all compatible minimal cover sets of decision rules, Knowledge-Based Syst., Vol. 89, pp. 569-583, 2015.
Adler N., Friedman L. and Sinuany-Stern Z.: Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context, Eur. J. Oper. Res., Vol. 140, No. 2, pp. 249-265, Jul. 2002.
Hullermeier E. and Furnkranz J.: Ranking by Pairwise Comparison: A Note on Risk Minimization, Fuzzy Syst. 2004. Proceedings. 2004 IEEE Int. Conf., Vol. 1, pp. 97-102, 2004.
Tavana M., Di Caprio D. and Santos-Arteaga F.J.: An ordinal ranking criterion for the subjective evaluation of alternatives and exchange reliability, Inf. Sci. (Ny), Vol. 317, pp. 295-314, 2015.
Tran N.M.: Pairwise ranking: Choice of method can produce arbitrarily different rank order, Linear Algebra Appl., Vol. 438, No. 3, pp. 1012-1024, 2013.