Ladies and Gentlemen, does gender really matter?Unpacking the role of gender in web-based peer assessments

Resumen

Centuries worth of evidence have recognised gender as a variable that could affect various educational outcomes. However, gender's role in peer assessment has been underexplored despite its documented importance. Some studies report that gender issues may affect the peer scores and peer feedback that male and female assessors provide to same-sex or opposite-sex peers (Falchikov & Magin, 1997; Noroozi et al., 2022; Tucker, 2014). On the other hand, some studies mention that assessees may not always use the peer feedback from opposite-sex peers due to its quality (Cao et al., 2019). As a result, it is not surprising that students show diverse intrapersonal and interpersonal reactions when participating in peer assessment (Panadero et al., 2023). Additionally, the potential of learning technologies, such as web-based peer assessment platforms, to address these issues still needs to be explored. Therefore, the overarching aim of this dissertation is to investigate gender's influence on web-based peer assessment, focusing on higher education students in the Philippines utilising the Eduflow online platform. The first study examined the peer scores assigned by trained or untrained male and female assessors to fictitious male or female peers, alongside their perceptions of trust and comfort when providing these scores. There were 145 (nMen= 25; nWomen=120) Psychology students enrolled in writing-focused courses that participated in this study. Half of the participants received peer assessment training, while the other half only received task instructions. Participants were divided into eight scoring subgroups where they peer scored poor, average, and excellent writing samples using a scoring rubric in Eduflow. We found that, regardless of their training condition, male and female assessors did not differ in their peer scores of male and female peers. However, male assessors showed less trust in their abilities and discomfort when peer scoring female assesses. In the second study, we examined the effects of gender and peer assessment training on the amount and content of peer feedback provided by male and female assessors to poor, average and excellent writing samples, using a randomised controlled design. A total of 240 undergraduate psychology students (nMen = 120; nWomen = 120) participated in the study. Half of the participants (nMen = 60, nWomen = 61) received peer assessment training, while the other half received task instructions only (nMen = 60, nWomen = 59). Participants were assigned to eight subgroups, providing peer feedback to writing samples attributed to fictitious male or female assessee. Analysis of 3,017 peer feedback segments revealed that female assessors provided a greater amount of peer feedback compared to male assessors. Women also offered more positive verifications and suggestive elaborations for average and poor writing samples. Additionally, fictitious male assessees received more suggestive elaborations, while trained assessors provided more positive verifications. The third study, we used a randomised controlled trial to investigate male and female assessees peer feedback uptake of the concise general or elaborated peer feedback messages provided by fictitious male, female, or anonymous peers. We also investigated interpersonal (i.e., perceived adequacy of feedback and trust) and intrapersonal (i.e., comfort and motivation) after receiving the peer feedback. A total of 284 (nMen = 138; nWomen = 146) undergraduate students from various academic programs participated in this study. Participants were assigned to twelve conditions where they received peer feedback on their argumentative essay draft provided by fictitious male or, female or anonymous peers. Our results suggest no significant triple interaction between peer feedback content, fictitious assessor gender, and assessee gender. However, we found that female assessees performed better when they received concise general feedback. Also, female assessors perceived that the concise general feedback a female assessor gives is more trustworthy and adequate. In the fourth study, we examined web-based peer assessment platforms in terms of their characteristics and features that can potentially affect student learning, feedback exchange, and social interaction. A total of 17 web-based peer assessment platforms were systematically reviewed against nine peer assessment design elements of Adachi et al. (2018a). Our results suggest that these platforms offer features to facilitate peer assessment in varied disciplines and in multiple ways, which has the potential to affect learning, feedback, and social interaction. However, as much as it offers technologically sound tools to aid instruction, we recommend extensive training for teachers and students to maximise the features embedded in these platforms. The studies presented in this dissertation magnify the centrality of students characteristics, specifically gender, in the overall peer assessment process. We used the MISCA model (i.e., Peer Assessment Message, Peer Assessment Implementation, Student Characteristics, Instructional Context, and Feedback Agents) as the main framework in discussing the results of the findings. We provided educational implications for students, teachers, and educational technologists to improve the use of peer assessment in web-based contexts. In general, we highlight the importance of implementing comprehensive training programs for students and teachers to cultivate awareness about the uniqueness of students and their characteristics and traits during peer assessment.