Evaluation of a peer- and self-grading process for clinical writing assignments

Abstract Objectives As class sizes in pharmacy education increase, faculty must develop new assessment strategies for essay writing assignments. This study evaluated accuracy and student perceptions of an innovative grading process that utilizes both peer- and self-assessment. Methods Four SOAP note sessions were evaluated. Each session included four activities: a writing workshop, assessment workshop, and reflection session. For each assessment workshop students scored their note and a blinded peer's note using a grading form, facilitated by a faculty-led discussion. In a subsequent reflection session, students reviewed their peer- and self-assigned grades and could petition for faculty review if desired. The average self-, peer-, and final-grades were compared for each of the four SOAP note sessions using ANOVA. After the fourth session, students completed an anonymous 10-question Likert-scale survey regarding their perceptions of the process and three open-response questions. Survey results were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Results Approximately 140 students participated. No difference was found between the average self-, peer-, and final-grades for all four sessions (p > 0.05). The survey response rate was 65% (91/140). Survey questions were grouped into three themes. The majority of students either strongly agreed or agreed that sessions were well organized and effective (≥84%), assessment workshops enhanced learning (≥68%), and the scoring method was fair (≥72%). The lowest score (mean 2.53 on a 4-point scale) reflected satisfaction with peer-provided feedback. When asked what they liked most, respondents most commonly cited that faculty-led review and discussion enhanced clinical knowledge. Implications The combination of a peer- and self-assessment process was accurate, well-received, and can be used to decrease faculty workload.