男人和女人真的不同吗?性别和培训对同伴评分和对同伴评估的看法的影响

IF 4.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
J. C. Ocampo, E. Panadero, Fernando Díez
{"title":"男人和女人真的不同吗?性别和培训对同伴评分和对同伴评估的看法的影响","authors":"J. C. Ocampo, E. Panadero, Fernando Díez","doi":"10.1080/02602938.2022.2130167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A number of studies have expressed that gender might be a source of difference and bias in peer assessment activities. However, evidence supporting this remains mixed and scant. The present study examined gender difference and accuracy bias between men and women assessors’ peer scoring of same-sex or opposite-sex writing samples using a quasi-experimental approach in which we implemented peer assessment training to explore if it could minimise gender difference and bias. Additionally, we also explored the effects on participants’ perceptions of trust and comfort in giving peer scores. A total of 145 (men = 25) psychology students enrolled in four separate courses participated in this study. Two of the classes received peer assessment training, while the other two only received task instructions. Participants were divided into eight scoring subgroups where they peer scored three writing samples of varying quality (poor, average and excellent) using a scoring rubric in Eduflow. We found that, regardless of their training condition, men and women assessors did not differ in their peer scores of men and women peers. Only untrained men assessors showed less trust in their abilities and discomfort when peer scoring women assessees’ writing samples.","PeriodicalId":48267,"journal":{"name":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are men and women really different? The effects of gender and training on peer scoring and perceptions of peer assessment\",\"authors\":\"J. C. Ocampo, E. Panadero, Fernando Díez\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02602938.2022.2130167\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract A number of studies have expressed that gender might be a source of difference and bias in peer assessment activities. However, evidence supporting this remains mixed and scant. The present study examined gender difference and accuracy bias between men and women assessors’ peer scoring of same-sex or opposite-sex writing samples using a quasi-experimental approach in which we implemented peer assessment training to explore if it could minimise gender difference and bias. Additionally, we also explored the effects on participants’ perceptions of trust and comfort in giving peer scores. A total of 145 (men = 25) psychology students enrolled in four separate courses participated in this study. Two of the classes received peer assessment training, while the other two only received task instructions. Participants were divided into eight scoring subgroups where they peer scored three writing samples of varying quality (poor, average and excellent) using a scoring rubric in Eduflow. We found that, regardless of their training condition, men and women assessors did not differ in their peer scores of men and women peers. Only untrained men assessors showed less trust in their abilities and discomfort when peer scoring women assessees’ writing samples.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2130167\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2130167","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

许多研究表明,性别可能是同行评议活动中差异和偏见的一个来源。然而,支持这一观点的证据仍然缺乏。本研究采用准实验的方法,考察了男性和女性评估员对同性或异性写作样本的同伴评分的性别差异和准确性偏差,其中我们实施了同伴评估培训,以探索是否可以最大限度地减少性别差异和偏差。此外,我们还探讨了在给予同伴分数时对参与者的信任和舒适感知的影响。共有145名(男性= 25)心理学专业的学生参加了这项研究。其中两个班接受了同行评估培训,而另外两个班只接受了任务指导。参与者被分成八个评分小组,他们的同伴使用Eduflow的评分标准对三个不同质量的写作样本(差,一般和优秀)进行评分。我们发现,无论他们的培训条件如何,男性和女性评估者在男性和女性同龄人的同龄人得分上没有差异。只有未经训练的男性评估者对自己的能力表现出较低的信任度,而当同行评估者的女性评估者的写作样本时,他们表现出不安。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are men and women really different? The effects of gender and training on peer scoring and perceptions of peer assessment
Abstract A number of studies have expressed that gender might be a source of difference and bias in peer assessment activities. However, evidence supporting this remains mixed and scant. The present study examined gender difference and accuracy bias between men and women assessors’ peer scoring of same-sex or opposite-sex writing samples using a quasi-experimental approach in which we implemented peer assessment training to explore if it could minimise gender difference and bias. Additionally, we also explored the effects on participants’ perceptions of trust and comfort in giving peer scores. A total of 145 (men = 25) psychology students enrolled in four separate courses participated in this study. Two of the classes received peer assessment training, while the other two only received task instructions. Participants were divided into eight scoring subgroups where they peer scored three writing samples of varying quality (poor, average and excellent) using a scoring rubric in Eduflow. We found that, regardless of their training condition, men and women assessors did not differ in their peer scores of men and women peers. Only untrained men assessors showed less trust in their abilities and discomfort when peer scoring women assessees’ writing samples.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
15.90%
发文量
70
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信