Résumés
Abstract
Anonymous marking, as a means to mitigate bias in grading, involves evaluating student work with their identities withheld. Anonymous marking is explored in this self-study to mitigate implicit bias, which negated a practitioner-researcher’s educational values. The mixed methods action research findings show withholding student identities during grading alleviates confirmation bias and the halo effect. Despite a short period of adjustment, anonymous marking promotes objectivity and fosters more consistent feedback. However, it prevents personalized feedback, jeopardizes relationship building, and undermines the detection of contract cheating. Moreover, anonymity cannot avert affectual influences and is impracticable for scaffolded formative assessments requiring follow-up feedback. Overall, anonymous marking is shown to be but one measure to counter assessment bias; strategies to mitigate bias unrelated to student identities need to be explored. This self-study also helped the author better understand her role as a practitioner and researcher, enabling her to generate her living-theory.
Keywords:
- Anonymous grading,
- Anonymous marking,
- Blind grading,
- Confirmation bias,
- Feedback bias,
- Halo effect,
- Implicit bias
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- About anonymous marking. (2022). D2L Brightspace. https://documentation.brightspace.com/EN/le/assignments/instructor/about_anonymous_marking.htm
- Batey, J. (2018). Expectancies, marking and feedback in undergraduate student assessment [Dissertation]. University of Winchester.
- Batten, J., Batey, J., Shafe, L., Gubby, L., & Birch, P. (2013). The influence of reputation information on the assessment of undergraduate student work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(4), 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2011.640928
- Brackett, M. A., Floman, J. L., Ashton-James, C., Cherkasskiy, L., & Salovey, P. (2013). The influence of teacher emotion on grading practices: A preliminary look at the evaluation of student writing. Teachers and Teaching, 19(6), 634–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.827453
- Brennan, D. J. (2008). University student anonymity in the summative assessment of written work. Higher Education Research & Development, 27(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360701658724
- Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. Routledge.
- Bygren, M. (2020). Biased grades? Changes in grading after a blinding of examinations reform. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 292–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1638885
- Chowdhury, S., Klauzner, I., & Slonim, R. (2020). What’s in a name? Does racial or gender discrimination in marking exist? (13890; IZA Discussion Paper). Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
- Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
- Elliott, J. (1998). Action research for educational change (repr). Oxford University Press.
- Feldman, A. (2003). Validity and quality in self-study. Educational Researcher, 32(3), 26–28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032003026
- Feldman, A., Paugh, P., & Mills, G. (2004). Self-study through action research. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International Handbook of Self-Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices (pp. 943–977). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6545-3_24
- Ferguson, P. (2011). Student perceptions of quality feedback in teacher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903197883
- Forgas, J. P. (2011). She just doesn’t look like a philosopher…? Affective influences on the halo effect in impression formation: Mood and halo effects. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(7), 812–817. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.842
- Gordon, A. (2021). Better than our biases: Using psychological research to inform our approach to inclusive, effective feedback. Clinical Law Review, 27(2), 195–252.
- Hamilton, M. L., & Pinnegar, S. (1998). Conclusion: The value and the promise of self-study. In Reconceptualizing teaching practice: Developing competence through self-study (pp. 235–246). Routledge.
- Henderson-Brooks, C. (2021). Marking as emotional labour: A discussion of the affective impact of assessment feedback on enabling educators. Henderson-Brooks, 8(1), 110–121.
- Hinton, D. P., & Higson, H. (2017). A large-scale examination of the effectiveness of anonymous marking in reducing group performance differences in higher education assessment. PLOS ONE, 12(8), e0182711. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182711
- Huskanovic, J., & Adem Nur, B. (2020). Discrimination against foreign named students: A study based on a Swedish university [Thesis, Linnaeus University]. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1441293/FULLTEXT01.pdf
- Ivankova, N. V. (2015). Mixed methods applications in action research: From methods to community action. SAGE Publications.
- Kiekkas, P., Igoumenidis, M., Stefanopoulos, N., Bakalis, N., Kefaliakos, A., & Aretha, D. (2016). Gender bias favors female nursing students in the written examination evaluation: Crossover study. Nurse Education Today, 45, 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.06.010
- LaBoskey, V. K. (2004). The methodology of self-study and Its theoretical underpinnings. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International Handbook of Self-Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices (pp. 817–869). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6545-3_21
- Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts: Selected papers on group dynamics. American Sociological Review, 13(6), 778. https://doi.org/10.2307/2086832
- Lindsey, P., & Crusan, D. (2011). How faculty attitudes and expectations toward student nationality affect writing assessment. Across the Disciplines, 8(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.37514/ATD-J.2011.8.4.23
- Loughran, J. (2007). Researching teacher education practices: Responding to the challenges, demands, and expectations of self-study. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487106296217
- Lowe, T., & Shaw, C. (2019). Student perceptions of the ‘best’ feedback practices: An evaluation of student-led teaching award nominations at a higher education institution. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 7(2), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.7.2.8
- MacDougall, M., Riley, S. C., Cameron, H. S., & McKinstry, R. (2008). Halos and horns in the assessment of undergraduate medical students: A consistency-based approach. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 3(2), 116–128.
- Malouff, J. M., Stein, S. J., Bothma, L. N., Coulter, K., & Emmerton, A. J. (2014). Preventing halo bias in grading the work of university students. Cogent Psychology, 1(1), 988937. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2014.988937
- Malouff, J. M., & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2016). Bias in grading: A meta-analysis of experimental research findings. Australian Journal of Education, 60(3), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116664618
- McDaniel, C. (1994). Anonymous grading: An ethical teaching strategy. Nurse Educator, 19(5), 11–12.
- McNiff, J. (2013). Action research: Principles and practice (Third edition). Routledge.
- Novaes, C. D. (2013, May 2). On anonymous grading. New APPS: Art, Politics, Philosophy, Science. https://www.newappsblog.com/2013/05/on-anonymous-grading.html
- O’Hagan, S. R., & Wigglesworth, G. (2015). Who’s marking my essay? The assessment of non-native-speaker and native-speaker undergraduate essays in an Australian higher education context. Studies in Higher Education, 40(9), 1729–1747. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.896890
- Ovens, A., & Garbett, D. (2020). Weaving self-studies through journaling: A systematic review. In Textiles and tapestries: Self-study for envisioning new ways of knowing (pp. 325–332). EdTech Books.
- Owen, C., Stefaniak, J., & Corrigan, G. (2010). Marking identifiable scripts: Following up student concerns. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(1), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930802474177
- Pinnegar, S., & Hamilton, M. L. (2009). Self-study of Practice as a Genre of Qualitative Research: Theory, Methodology, and Practice. Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9512-2
- Pitt, E., & Winstone, N. (2018). The impact of anonymous marking on students’ perceptions of fairness, feedback and relationships with lecturers. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1183–1193. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1437594
- Scott, E. L. (1995). “Mokita,” the truth that everybody knows, but nobody talks about: Bias in grading. Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 22(3), 211–216.
- Sharp, J. G., & Zhu, X. (2020). Anonymous marking in Higher Education: A review of literature for practitioners. Journal of Higher Education Research, 3(1). https://cpb-eu-w2.wpmucdn.com/blogs.lincoln.ac.uk/dist/c/8316/files/2020/04/Anonymous-Marking-Sharp-2020.pdf
- Shay, S., & Jones, B. (2008). Anonymous examination marking at University of Cape Town: The quest for an `agonising-free zone’. South African Journal of Higher Education, 20(4), 528–546. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajhe.v20i4.25682
- Staats, C., Capatosto, K., Tenney, L., & Mamo, S. (2017). State of the science: Implicit bias review 2017. Kirwan Institute For The Study Of Race & Ethnicity. http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/implicit-bias-training/resources/2017-implicit-bias-review.pdf
- Tufford, L., & Newman, P. (2012). Bracketing in qualitative research. Qualitative Social Work, 11(1), 80–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325010368316
- Whitehead, J. (1989). Creating a living educational theory from questions of the kind, ‘How do I Improve my practice?’ Cambridge Journal of Education, 19(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764890190106
- Whitelegg, D. (2002). Breaking the feedback loop: Problems with anonymous assessment. Planet, 5(1), 7–8. https://doi.org/10.11120/plan.2002.00050007
- Wyatt–Smith, C., & Castleton, G. (2005). Examining how teachers judge student writing: An Australian case study. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(2), 131–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027032000242887