Marking the markers: evaluating the potential of professional development through collaborative marking circles

This case study details a three-day 'marking circle' activity where six academics, who co-author this case study, with varied lengths of experience collaboratively marked 25 undergraduate bioscience essays. Observations from this activity, discussed in a focus group, highlighted a significant tension: while the process was too time-consuming to be a sustainable method for routine marking, it was an extremely valuable and enjoyable professional development exercise. The activity revealed substantial inconsistencies between markers, with mark variations often exceeding 20%. In a focus group discussion between the markers, these discrepancies were attributed to several elements: procedural, structural, personal and experiential factors that led to different decisions between the markers when assigning numerical grades. This case study proposes a streamlined, two-stage model to harness the activity's developmental benefits in a more time-efficient manner: first, using a small group to pilot and refine a rubric, and second, using the refined rubric in a wider-scale professional development context.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Emerging Topics in Life Sciences
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1042/etls20253033
Primary Topic
Evaluation of Teaching Practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Marking the markers: evaluating the potential of professional development through collaborative marking circles

Larissa Nelson, Hannah Shaw, William C. Kay, Nigel Francis et al.
Emerging Topics in Life Sciences
Evaluation of Teaching Practices
article

Marking the markers: evaluating the potential of professional development through collaborative marking circles

Larissa Nelson, Hannah Shaw, William C. Kay, Nigel Francis, Stephen Rutherford, Connie Pritchard
article en

Abstract

This case study details a three-day 'marking circle' activity where six academics, who co-author this case study, with varied lengths of experience collaboratively marked 25 undergraduate bioscience essays. Observations from this activity, discussed in a focus group, highlighted a significant tension: while the process was too time-consuming to be a sustainable method for routine marking, it was an extremely valuable and enjoyable professional development exercise. The activity revealed substantial inconsistencies between markers, with mark variations often exceeding 20%. In a focus group discussion between the markers, these discrepancies were attributed to several elements: procedural, structural, personal and experiential factors that led to different decisions between the markers when assigning numerical grades. This case study proposes a streamlined, two-stage model to harness the activity's developmental benefits in a more time-efficient manner: first, using a small group to pilot and refine a rubric, and second, using the refined rubric in a wider-scale professional development context.

Emerging Topics in Life SciencesVol. 9(5)
Cardiff University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Evaluation of Teaching Practices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.