[19] Peer reviewing; more or less useful than a 1:1?


Peer reviewing; more or less useful than a 1:1?


Charlie Earle and Sam Hopkinson


Cardiac and Respiratory Healthcare Science students at Swansea University are required to complete a competency-based portfolio in accordance with the National School of Healthcare Science Practitioner Training Programme (PTP). The clinical portfolio is an example of independent learning, whereby students are required to prove clinical competency by a result of their efforts, and given the freedom to choose how to obtain the competencies. Many students struggle with independent learning, as it is not explicitly ‘taught’, this contributes to substantial numbers of repeat submissions for this module, especially in year 1. Strategically placed portfolio review sessions are a student’s main point-of-contact with the University, to go through their academic progress in relation to the clinical competencies. Traditionally, these have been one-to-one sessions, with students having approximately 30-45 minutes of supervision. Past experiences of these review sessions have involved large amounts of work for the academic (approximately 22 hours for each member of the year group to have one review), with little input from the student during these sessions. This year (2019) two 3.5 hour peer portfolio review sessions were held as an alternative to one of the 1:1 opportunities.

Students (n=29) were allocated one session to attend. During the session students were divided into small groups, and portfolios were exchanged between groups by the lecturers. Each student was then given a standardised portfolio marking form to complete whist performing the review. This process was repeated until each student had reviewed three different portfolios. Marking forms were returned to the students in the portfolio anonymously so they did not know who had given the feedback.

A short questionnaire was administered online immediately after the teaching session. This poster will correlate published literature with the student feedback, to decide if peer review portfolio sessions are useful to students for this module.

Session Outline

A poster will be made with engaging graphics, clear titles/subtitles, and graphs.

Key Messages

The importance of peer review.
How students perceive peer review sessions, and the feedback they receive.
Time-saving measures for lecturers whilst maintaining/improving student experience and learning.
Increasing student understanding and ownership over tasks.

Key Words

peer review, clinical portfolio, feedback

FOR STAFF USE ONLY : Poster board, adhesive.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s