Anonymous Marking Pilot Project at the University of Kent

The main arguments in favour of anonymous marking relate to the notion of minimising marker, gender and ethnicity bias (Belsey, 1988; Bradley, 1984) subsequently resulting in a fairer marking process. In more recent times research findings have been inconclusive (see Richardson, 2007 and Singh, 2011 for reviews). However, whilst not a full proof method it has been generally concluded that anonymous marking can promote students’ confidence in the fairness of the assessment process. Indeed, the NUS, who have campaigned for the widespread introduction themselves have suggested that it “reduces both the fear and likelihood of discrimination” (NUS, 2013, p3). Further they argue that It also protects staff from potential accusations of prejudice, since it removes the opportunity to prejudge student work (that comes from a knowledge of a student’s past performance), which may cloud judgement (Fleming, 1999). Critics of anonymous marking have argued that it appears to erode trust in the assessment process and, in particular, depersonalises teaching and undermines the development aspect of feedback (see, Baty, 2007; Southee, 2009; Price et al, 2010; Beals, 2012; MacDonald Ross, 2012).

In light of the current anonymous marking debate, the Assessment and Feedback Steering Group at the University of Kent requested that institutional data from students and experiences of staff engaged in anonymous marking should be explored in order to inform policy based decision for the University of Kent. Results from this study will be presented and future directions will be discussed.