With group work increasing in popularity at universities, students no longer feel it is
acceptable to be awarded the same group mark. This presents a significant challenge
in awarding an individual mark which reflects unequivocally the time and effort a
student has invested in a group project. To address this challenge, a tool to evaluate
individual peer assessed contribution (IPAC) has been developed at University
College London (UCL). The aim of this paper is to report on the perceptions of students
regarding their experience of peer assessment in group work, since these perceptions
are key to ensuring that a tool, such as IPAC, is accepted and used effectively by staff
and students alike. The views of 133 students were acquired through anonymous
surveys and focus groups ranging from first year undergraduate to doctoral students
across 12 different departments. Results showed that 92% of students are in favour
of peer assessment with a positive trend to using the IPAC tool. Receiving constructive
feedback was considered imperative amongst respondents, which in turn should
identify clearly the points of error; highlight explicitly the areas for improvement; and
thus reflect accurately the mark being awarded. The attributes that students valued to
be important when assessing their teammates were, in decreasing order of priority,
attendance at meetings, listening and communication, actual contribution to the project
deliverables, quality of the work produced, personal circumstances, and finally time
management and organization skills. The detailed analysis and conclusions drawn
from this study are the focus of this paper
