Self-assessment improved students' discussion and conclusion sections, not procedural ones.

Students often struggle to critique their own work, and educators do not fully know which writing skills self-assessment actually improves. Researchers tested a new setup in a UK foundation-year engineering laboratory class. Students used a structured self-assessment coversheet based on marking criteria alongside a progressive authorshipprogressive authorshipA scheme where students take on more of the report writing as they advance. plan. The researchers wanted to see which parts of laboratory reports improved the most. They found that students made their biggest gains in sections needing critical thinking and argument, specifically the Discussion and Conclusions sections. Meanwhile, routine procedural sections showed smaller, less reliable gains. Students who engaged more deeply with the criteria also judged their own work more accurately. This suggests judging one's own work helps build evaluative writing skills rather than simple procedural skills.

Why it matters

For teachers, this suggests that asking students to self-assess against criteria may strengthen the parts of reports that demand evaluation and argument, rather than routine description. It also warns that engagement with criteria does not guarantee accurate self-assessment for every student, so the method needs careful support.

Questions answered