What happens when students get the chance to become the marker before submitting their own work?
This action research project began with a practical problem: high numbers of resubmissions across BTEC Level 3 Computing and IT courses. Some learners were submitting minimum-standard work simply to meet the deadline, knowing they would have another opportunity to improve it later — creating extra pressure for both students and teaching staff.
The study introduced peer-to-peer marking, giving learners anonymised examples of previous assignments and asking them to judge the work against Pass, Merit and Distinction criteria. By discussing what was missing and deciding whether work should pass, fail or be resubmitted, students began to see much more clearly what was expected in their own assignments.
The results were encouraging. Resubmission rates fell across the comparable units — including 87% to 71% in Unit 1, 71% to 57% in Unit 7 and 43% to 36% in Unit 10 — while the tutor also reported a noticeable improvement in the quality of first submissions.
Learner feedback suggested that the process changed more than just submission rates: 15 of the 18 students responding positively to all of the peer-marking questions, with students saying the exercise helped them understand what good-quality work actually looked like and recognise the need to manage their time better.
The paper explores whether giving learners a greater role in assessment can improve standards, reduce unnecessary resubmissions and help students take more responsibility for the quality of their work.