Peer- and Self-Assessment in Primary School English Language Classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peer- and self-assessment could benefit the pupils in learning English language as a second language due to the aspects of essential whole group and individual reflections within the practice. This paper intends to investigate the practices of peer- and self-assessment among the national primary school English language teachers in a district in Selangor, Malaysia via a mixed methods approach. A survey was administered on 244 teachers, followed by interview and classroom observation on eight subset participants. From the survey, approximately 93% of the respondents had an emerging practice of peer- and self-assessment in their English language classrooms, which happened 50% of the time. The interview and observation findings show that the teachers needed extra time to train the pupils for the practice of peer- and self-assessment, mostly on written work, but also applicable during reading and speaking lessons. Pupils could apply self-assessment by knowing their levels and what to be done, sometimes based on worksheets and checklists. Sometimes, peer- and self-assessment were difficult and confusing among the pupils with lower English language proficiency levels. In the classroom, the pupils needed more time to receive guidance and training from the teachers in order to practise peer- and self-assessment, despite not fully in English. This implies that the teachers were attempting to enact peer- and self-assessment among the pupils, albeit rather deviating from the target language at times.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".