IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/innchp/978-3-319-10804-9_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Is University Students’ Self-Assessment Accurate?

In: Sustainable Learning in Higher Education

Author

Listed:
  • Alicia Bolívar-Cruz

    (University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria)

  • Domingo Verano-Tacoronte

    (University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria)

  • Sara M. González-Betancor

    (University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria)

Abstract

The paper’s main objective is to evaluate the self-assessment accuracy of university students. Specifically, the study analyzes the self-assessment of oral communication skills. It was carried out in a Firm Labor Organization course included in the Labor Relations and Human Resources Degree. The literature on self-assessment in Higher Education does not provide clear evidence about its accuracy, as a number of methodological problems have been detected. To reduce them, we have taken a number of precautions. Thus, a rubric was designed, and students were trained to use it. Several teachers and peers were introduced as referents, and a segmented analysis was conducted based on gender and the students’ level of competence from the teachers’ point of view. Results show that self-assessment accuracy is low. Moreover, regardless of the degree, men’s self-assessments are higher than women’s. Moreover, the findings suggest that the scoring rubric improves self-assessment accuracy when the speaker has good oral communication skills, but not when these skills are poor. These results lead us to propose the development of correction factors that can be adapted to any situation, thus allowing self-assessment to be used for summative purposes.

Suggested Citation

  • Alicia Bolívar-Cruz & Domingo Verano-Tacoronte & Sara M. González-Betancor, 2015. "Is University Students’ Self-Assessment Accurate?," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, in: Marta Peris-Ortiz & José M. Merigó Lindahl (ed.), Sustainable Learning in Higher Education, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 21-35, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:innchp:978-3-319-10804-9_2
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-10804-9_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:innchp:978-3-319-10804-9_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.