Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 98, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 891-901

  Cho, Kwangsu ^a   Schunn, Christian D ^b   Wilson, Roy W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Peer evaluation and instructor evaluation; Peer review of writing; Reliability and validity; Scaffolds; The SWoRD system; Writing support

Indexed keywords

EID: 33751015138     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.891     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Boud, D. (1989). The role of self-assessment in student grading, assessment and evaluation. Studies in Higher Education, 14, 20-30.
2. Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1999). Peer and teacher assessment of the oral and written tasks of a group project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24, 301-314.
3. Cho, K., Chung, T., King, W., & Schunn, C. D. (in press). Peer-based computer-supported knowledge refinement: An empirical investigation. Communications of the ACM.
4. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (in press). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline. Computers & Education.
5. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23, 260-294.
6. Dancer, W. T., & Dancer, J. (1992). Peer rating in higher education. Journal of Education for Business, 67, 306-309.
7. Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative self and peer group assessments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 11, 146-166.
8. Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70, 287-322.
9. Flower, L. S., Hayes, J. R., Carey, L., Schriver, K., & Stratman, J. (1986). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication, 37, 16-55.
10. Haaga, D. A. F. (1993). Peer review of term papers in graduate psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 20(1), 28-32.
11. Hewitt, J. P. (2002). The social construction of self-esteem. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 135-147). Oxford, England: University Press.
12. Hinds, P. J. (1999). The curse of expertise: The effects of expertise and debiasing methods on predictions of novice performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 5, 205-221.
13. Hunter, J. E. (1983). A causal analysis of cognitive ability, job knowledge, job performance, and supervisor ratings. In F. Landy, S. Zedeck, & J. Clevelands (Eds.), Performance measurement and theory (pp. 257-266). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Kelley, C. M. & Jacoby, L. L. (1996). Adult egocentrism: Subjective experience versus analytic bases for judgment. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 157-175.
15. Lynch, D. H., & Golen, S. (1992, September/October). Peer evaluation of writing in business communication classes. Journal of Education for Business, 44-48.
16. Magin, D. (2001). Reciprocity as a source of bias in multiple peer assessment of group work. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 53-63.
17. Marcoulides, G. A., & Simkin, M. G. (1995). The consistency of peer review in student writing projects. Journal of Education for Business, 70, 220-223.
18. Marsh, H. W., & Ball, S. (1989). The peer review process used to evaluate manuscripts submitted to academic journals: Interjudgmental reliability. Journal of Experimental Education, 57, 151-169.
19. Mathews, B. (1994). Assessing individual contributions: Experience of peer evaluation in major group projects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 25, 19-28.
20. McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1, 30-46.
21. Mowl, G., & Pain, R. (1995). Using self and peer assessment to improve students' essay writing - A case study from geography. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 324-335.
22. National Commission on Writing in American Schools and Colleges. (2003). The neglected "R": The need for a writing revolution. Retrieved August 28, 2006, from http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/ neglectedr.pdf
23. Rada, R., Michailidis, A., & Wang, W. (1994). Collaborative hypermedia in a classroom setting. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 3, 21-36.
24. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
25. Rushton, C., Ramsey, P., & Rada, R. (1993). Peer assessment in a collaborative hypermedia environment: A case study. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20, 75-80.
26. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
27. Stefani, L. A. J. (1994). Peer, self and tutor assessment: Relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19(1), 69-75.
28. Stemler, S. E. (2004). A comparison of consensus, consistency, and measurement approaches to estimating interrater reliability. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9(4). Retrieved August 28, 2006, from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=4
29. Swanson, D., Case, S., & van der Vlueten, C. (1991). Strategies for student assessment. In D. Bond & G. Feletti (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning (pp. 260-273). London: Kogan Page.
30. Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in college and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.
31. Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25, 149-169.
32. Winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design (2nd ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.