Peer Assessment - Physical Education

Peer Assessment - Physical Education

The premise of Johnson Johnson's article, "Peer Assessments in Physical Education," is to highlight the issue of peer assessment, and how this could be beneficial in the Physical Education class. While acknowledging the possible pitfalls of peer assessment, Johnson places a generally positive focus on the issue. He also suggests specific ways in which to handle peer assessment in physical education in order to obtain results that are maximally positive. Peer assessment is currently a very prominent issue in curriculum design. The debate entails that peer assessment is an important curriculum tool to empower students, while the opposite side holds that peer assessment carries too many risks, such as unreliability.

One of the problems in the non-peer assessed Physical Education class is the lack of substantive feedback (Johnson 34). Related to this problem is the fact that students are not given the opportunity to learn from their mistakes or to improve upon their performance. Instead, by a single assessment method, students are obliged to settle for their existing performance and grade. Furthermore, in the conventional assessment method, such grading is somewhat mysterious to students, as few physical educators bother to explain the grading system.

As mentioned above, the author acknowledges that peer assessment may present some inherent challenges. Of these, the main problem is the fact that, if not handled correctly, the method can be somewhat unreliable. The problem is that students are inexperienced in the assessment process and standards. Furthermore, they may be biased towards or against the classmates being assessed.

Johnson suggests that this can be remedied by proper teacher preparation. There are several ways in which this can be handled. In order to ensure proper standards, for example, a peer-assessment rubric is suggested (Johnson 35). According to the article, this will enhance the assessment experience on various levels. In addition to specific factors of assessment considered important for the validity of the process, a rubric also enhances documentation procedures and standardization.

It is on this premise that Johnson emphasizes the possible benefits of peer assessment. Specifically, Johnson states that peer assessment can increase student involvement in learning by taking responsibility for the assessment and learning process, increase social interactions and trust, enable individual, targeted feedback, help focus on the process of learning, and offer enrichment opportunities. The most important element, according to the author is trust.

According to the article (Johnson 38), trust begins with the physical educator, who explains and repeats the peer assessment procedure and purpose. The educator therefore needs to ensure that all students understand the purpose of peer assessment to be for the benefit of all involved. The educator also needs to emphasize that he or she trusts the assessors to perform the best they can in assessing their classmates. Those who perform the actions to be assessed must also be able to trust the assessors to help them improve rather than to judge them from a negative viewpoint. This is a vital starting point for the success of a peer assessment program.

In peer assessment, it is also important that the educator supervise the assessment process at all times to ensure not only the maintenance of standard, but also to maintain the initially established trust on all levels. In this way, assessors are aware that they are monitored in their tasks, and performers are assured that assessors will indeed do their best in this process.

Before the assessment procedure can begin, the physical educator must therefore continue establishing trust by ensuring that all students are aware of the process and how to handle their various duties. Johnson provides nine elements of the assessment that the educator needs to demonstrate to ensure that educational standards in assessment are upheld. These include demonstrations of: 1) skill performance conditions, 2) a single skilled-feature focus, 3) how to observe, 4) what to do when uncertain, 5) how to record observations, 6) the skill assessment sequence, 7) tactful feedback methods, 8) "good sport" behavior, and 9) finally, both the educator and assessors are to check for understanding.

The above specific suggestions correlate well with Langan and Wheater's response to the common concern that peer assessment is unreliable: it depends very much upon how it is handled within the classroom. The authors also suggest that, before students are empowered by peer assessment, there needs to be an open dialogue between educators and students. As Johnson mentions, it is vital that close monitoring take place, if not throughout the peer assessment process, then at least in its early stages. When this is done correctly, enormous benefits can be derived from the process.

Another problem associated with peer assessment, even when done for the maximum benefit of students, is that it requires a large amount of preparation to implement. The teacher needs to take time to thoroughly prepare documents such as the assessment rubric and instructions, and class time is often taken up to a large extent by training assessor students to perform their tasks. Johnson (40) is however of the opinion that the benefits of peer assessment far outweigh its potential problems, drawbacks and risks.

Some additional advantages to the ones mentioned above include the fact that students receive the opportunity to take responsibility for their own learning, and for that of their peers. This, as Langan and Wheater mention, serves an empowering function in an environment where students are often at the mercy of their schooling system and/or teachers. Furthermore, the enjoyment of the learning experience can be enhanced by peer assessment activities. On an educational level, the assessor students are cognitively engaged in their tasks of estimating the performance of their classmates. Performing students on the other hand receive individual feedback on specific problem areas, where an educator is not always able to provide this. Furthermore, the lack of improvement opportunities is mitigated by the fact that feedback is focused upon improvement, and students receive the opportunity to prepare and practice their performance before the final assessment. In general, the teaching experience is greatly enhanced and also more enjoyable for students. According to Johnson's conclusion, therefore, the benefits of peer assessment are weighty enough to mitigate any drawbacks or criticism.

Langan and Wheater appear to agree with this point-of-view. Benefits that they identify for peer assessment include: student autonomy and empowerment; development of learner confidence in both peer and self-evaluation; an understanding of the assessment paradigm; and a clear understanding of what is required to improve upon performance.