A large-scale examination of the effectiveness of anonymous marking in reducing group performance differences in higher education assessment

The present research aims to more fully explore the issues of performance differences in higher education assessment, particularly in the context of a common measure taken to address them. The rationale for the study is that, while performance differences in written examinations are relatively well researched, few studies have examined the efficacy of anonymous marking in reducing these performance differences, particularly in modern student populations. By examining a large archive (N = 30674) of assessment data spanning a twelve-year period, the relationship between assessment marks and factors such as ethnic group, gender and socio-environmental background was investigated. In particular, analysis focused on the impact that the implementation of anonymous marking for assessment of written examinations and coursework has had on the magnitude of mean score differences between demographic groups of students. While group differences were found to be pervasive in higher education assessment, these differences were observed to be relatively small in practical terms. Further, it appears that the introduction of anonymous marking has had a negligible effect in reducing them. The implications of these results are discussed, focusing on two issues, firstly a defence of examinations as a fair and legitimate form of assessment in Higher Education, and, secondly, a call for the re-examination of the efficacy of anonymous marking in reducing group performance differences

Placing peer ratings in context: Systematic influences beyond ratee performance

Performance evaluation research indicates that variance in ratings may be attributable to systematic sources beyond the actual performance of the ratee. However, the majority of prior work compares ratings across sources and uses ratings from a single rating event. Using confirmatory factor analysis and multivariate latent growth modeling (MLGM), we specifically examine peer ratings from 740 participants on 5 performance dimensions across 3 distinct performance situations for systematic sources of variance beyond ratee performance. Results demonstrate that both ratee performance and the performance context have systematic effects, with contextual effects varying by how “strong” or “weak” the situation is for a given performance dimension. Furthermore, MLGMresults suggest that the influence of performance dynamism is only meaningfully interpreted when contextual effects are modeled

Ballet for the Sun King: Power, Talent and Organisation

Notions of “talent” and “celebrity” dominate popular culture. Whether on TV shows, in popular media or in the workplace, people talk about “talent” as something that generates or leads to prosperity and success. Drawing on the work of Norbert Elias, in this chapter we argue that the “elitist” and “subjective” forms of talent management evident in contemporary business organisations were originally institutionalised bycan be traced back to Louis XIVs management of the French Court in the seventeenth century. Building on Elias’s dance metaphor, we argue that talent management is structured by a plethora of management technologies and performance measures that allow senior management to maintain the boundaries of the permissible and ward off dissent before it threatens the established order