Leveraging Human Intelligence: Assessment for Learning Through Peer Feedback and Self-Reflection

Author Information

Negar Riazifar, University of Warwick, United Kingdom
Edwina Jones, University of Warwick, United Kingdom
Sam Grierson, University College Birmingham, United Kingdom
Kerry Dobbins, University of Warwick, United Kingdom

Abstract

Student satisfaction with assessment and feedback remains a persistent weakness in UK higher education, and formative activity often fails—not because it is poorly designed, but because students rarely complete it. This paper reframes that as a design problem. We developed Assessment for Learning and Skills Development (ALSD), a scaffolded framework combining student choice in authentic formative assessment, structured peer feedback, guided reflection, and a personal ePortfolio, and piloted it in a postgraduate MSc module with 90 international students. Drawing on a whole-cohort survey, an analysis of ePortfolio quality against summative performance, and two focus groups, we asked what activities, resources and guidance make such a journey scaffolded, supported and feasible for a diverse cohort. Students rated resources and tutor support uniformly highly, judged workload as balanced, and identified peer feedback as the most valuable element. Notably, several described the in-class model as reducing their workload rather than adding to it, and the depth of a student's engagement was associated with stronger summative performance. The findings suggest that the tension between rich formative learning and manageable workload depends largely on where the work sits in the curriculum, and that the framework's most valued mechanisms, peer judgement, tutor presence and structured reflection, are human ones.

Save as a Favourite

• Category: Assessment Theories & Methodologies

Posted by James Alexander Gordon

All Posts