The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment: Effects on construct validity, performance, and perceptions of fairness and comfort

Studies in Educational Evaluation

Volumn 39, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 195-203

  Panadero, Ernesto ^a,b   Romero, Margarida ^b   Strijbos, Jan Willem ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Construct validity; Friendship; Peer assessment; Reliability; Rubric

Indexed keywords

EID: 84888821704     PISSN: 0191491X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.005     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Ainsworth S., Gelmini-Hornsby G., Threapleton K., Crook C., O'Malley C., Buda M. Anonimity in classroom voting and debating. Learning and Instruction 2011, 21:365-378.
2. Andrade H. Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self-assessment and the self-regulation of learning. Handbook of formative assessment 2010, 90-105. Routledge, New York. H.J. Andrade, G.J. Cizek (Eds.).
3. Andrade H., Valtcheva A. Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory into Practice 2009, 48(1):12-19.
4. Ballantyne R., Hughes K., Mylonas A. Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 2002, 27(5):427-441. 10.1080/0260293022000009302.
5. Barron B. When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences 2003, 12(3):307-359. 10.1207/s15327809jls1203_1.
6. Berry J.W., Chew S.L. Improving learning through interventions of student-generated questions and concept maps. Teaching of Psychology 2008, 35(4):305-312. 10.1080/00986280802373841.
7. Besterfield-Sacre M., Gerchak J., Lyons M., Shuman L.J., Wolfe H. Scoring concept maps: An integrated rubric for assessing engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education 2004, 93(2):105-115.
8. Boud D., Cohen R., Sampson J. Peer learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 1999, 24(4):413-426. 10.1080/0260293990240405.
9. Brown G.T.L., Glasswell K., Harland D. Accuracy in the scoring of writing: Studies of reliability and validity using a New Zealand writing assessment system. Assessing Writing 2004, 9(2):105-121. 10.1016/j.asw.2004.07.001.
10. Cheng W., Warren M. Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise. Studies in Higher Education 1997, 22(2):233-239. 10.1080/03075079712331381064.
11. Cho K., Schunn C.D., Wilson R.W. Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology 2006, 98(4):891-901. 10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.891.
12. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
13. Diaz Barriga F. Estrategias docentes para un aprendizaje significativo: Una interpretación constructivista 2002, McGraw-Hill, Mexico, DF.
14. Dochy F., Segers M., Sluijsmans D. The use of self-, peer- and co-assessment in higher education. A review. Studies in Higher Education 1999, 24(3):331-350.
15. Edmonson A.C. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly 1999, 44:350-385.
16. Falchikov N. Involving students in assessment. Psychology Learning and Teaching 2003, 3(2):102-108.
17. Falchikov N. Improving assessment through student involvement: Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education 2005, Routledge, Oxon, UK.
18. Falchikov N., Goldfinch J. Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research 2000, 70(3):287-322.
19. Hafner O.C., Hafner P. Quantitative analysis of the rubric as an assessment tool: An empirical study of student peer-group rating. International Journal of Science Education 2003, 25(12):1509-1528. 10.1080/0950069022000038268.
20. Hanrahan S.J., Isaacs G. Assessing self- and peer-assessment: The students' views. Higher Education Research & Development 2001, 20(1):53-70. 10.1080/07294360123776.
21. Harris L.R., Brown G.T.L. Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer- and self-assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers' implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education 2013, 36:101-111. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2013.07.008.
22. Hayes A.F., Krippendorff K. Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures 2007, 1:77-89.
23. Hays R.B. The development and maintenance of friendship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 1984, 1(1):75-98. 10.1177/0265407584011005.
24. Hilbert T.S., Renkl A. Learning how to use a computer-based concept-mapping tool: Self-explaining examples helps. Computers in Human Behavior 2009, 25(2):267-274. 10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.006.
25. Jacobs-Lawson J.M., Hershey D.A. Concept maps as an assessment tool in psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology 2002, 29(1):25-29. 10.1207/s15328023top2901_06.
26. Jehn K.A., Shah P.P. Interpersonal relationships and task performance: An examination of mediation processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1997, 72(4):775-790. 10.1037/0022-3514.72.4.775.
27. Jones A., Issroff K. Learning technologies: Affective and social issues in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education 2005, 44(4):395-408. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.04.004.
28. Jonsson A., Svingby G. The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review 2007, 2:130-144.
29. Kali Y., Ronen M. Assessing the assessors: Added value in web-based multi-cycle peer assessment in higher education. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 2008, 3:3-32.
30. Kane M.T. Current concerns in validity theory. Journal of Educational Measurement 2001, 38(4):319-342.
31. Karaca E. An evaluation of teacher trainees' opinions of the peer assessment in terms of some variables. World Applied Sciences Journal 2009, 6(1):123-128.
32. Lindblom-Ylänne S., Pihlajamäki H., Kotkas T. Self-, peer- and teacher-assessment of student essays. Active Learning in Higher Education 2006, 7(1):51-62. 10.1177/1469787406061148.
33. MacDonald R.A.R., Miell D. Creativity and music education: The impact of social variables. International Journal of Music Education 2000, os-36(1):58-68. 10.1177/025576140003600107.
34. Magin D. Reciprocity as a source of bias in multiple peer assessment of group work. Studies in Higher Education 2001, 26(1):53-63. 10.1080/03075070020030715.
35. Messick S. Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry in score meaning. American Psychologist 1995, 50(9):741-749.
36. Moni R.W., Beswick E., Moni K.B. Using student feedback to construct an assessment rubric for a concept map in physiology. Advances in Physiology Education 2005, 29:197-203.
37. Moni R.W., Moni K.B. Student perceptions and use of an assessment rubric for a group concept map in physiology. Advances in Physiology Education 2008, 32:47-54.
38. Nesbit J.C., Adesope O.O. Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 2006, 76(3):413-448. 10.3102/00346543076003413.
39. Neuendorf K.A. The content analysis guidebook 2002, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
40. Panadero E., Alonso-Tapia J., Huertas J.A. Rubrics and self-assessment scripts effects on self-regulation, learning and self-efficacy in secondary education. Learning and Individual Differences 2012, 22(6):806-813. 10.1016/j.lindif.2012.04.007.
41. Panadero E., Alonso-Tapia J., Huertas J.A. Rubrics vs. self-assessment scripts: Effects on first year university students' self-regulation and performance. Infancia y Aprendizaje 2014, 37(1).
42. Panadero E., Alonso-Tapia J., Reche E. Rubrics vs. self-assessment scripts effect on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy in pre-service teachers. Studies in Educational Evaluation 2013, 10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.04.001.
43. Panadero E., Jonsson A. The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review 2013, 9:129-144. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002.
44. Papinczak T., Young L., Groves M. Peer assessment in problem-based learning: A qualitative study. Advances in Health Sciences Education 2007, 12(2):169-186. 10.1007/s10459-005-5046-6.
45. Pond K., Ul-Haq R. Learning to assess students using peer review. Studies in Educational Evaluation 1997, 23(4):331-348.
46. Pope N.K.L. An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 2001, 26(3):235-246. 10.1080/02602930120052396.
47. Pope N.K.L. The impact of stress in self- and peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 2005, 30(1):51-63. 10.1080/0260293042003243896.
48. Rose S., Serafica F.C. Keeping and ending casual, close and best friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 1986, 3(3):275-288. 10.1177/0265407586033002.
49. Sadler P.M., Good E. The impact of self- and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment 2006, 11(1):1-31.
50. Sambell K., McDowell L., Brown S. But is it fair? An explorative study of student perceptions of the consequential validity of assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation 1997, 23(4):349-371.
51. Shavelson R.J., Ruiz-Primo M.A., Wiley E.W. Windows into the mind. Higher Education 2005, 49(4):413-430. 10.1007/s10734-004-9448-9.
52. Smith H., Cooper A., Lancaster L. Improving the quality of undergraduate peer assessment: A case for student and staff development. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 2002, 39(1):71-81. 10.1080/13558000110102904.
53. Stellmack M.A., Konheim-Kalkstein Y.L., Manor J.E., Massey A.R., Schmitz J.A.P. An assessment of reliability and validity of a rubric for grading APA-style introductions. Teaching of Psychology 2009, 36(2):102-107. 10.1080/00986280902739776.
54. Strijbos J.W., Ochoa T.A., Sluijsmans D.M.A., Segers M.S.R., Tillema H.H. Fostering interactivity through formative peer assessment in (web-based) collaborative learning environments. Cognitive and emotional processes in web-based education: Integrating human factors and personalization 2009, 375-395. IGI Global, Hershey, PA. C. Mourlas, N. Tsianos, P. Germanakos (Eds.).
55. Strijbos J.W., Sluijsmans D. Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments. Learning and Instruction 2010, 20(4):265-269. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.002.
56. Tabachnik B.G., Fidell L.S. Using multivariate statistics 2001, Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA.
57. Tolmie A.K., Topping K.J., Christie D., Donaldson C., Howe C., Jessiman E., et al. Social effects of collaborative learning in primary schools. Learning and Instruction 2010, 20(3):177-191. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.01.005.
58. Topping K. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research 1998, 68(3):249-276.
59. Topping K. Self and peer assessment in school and university: Reliability, validity and utility. Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards 2003, 55-87. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. M. Segers, F. Dochy, E. Cascallar (Eds.).
60. Toth E.E., Suthers D.D., Lesgold A.M. Mapping to know: The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education 2002, 86(2):264-286.
61. Tsai C.-C., Liang J.-C. The development of science activities via on-line peer assessment: The role of scientific epistemological views. Instructional Science 2009, 37:293-310.
62. Tseng S.-C., Tsai C.-C. On-line peer assessment and the role for of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers and Education 2007, 49:1161-1174.
63. Van Gennip N.A.E., Segers M.S.R., Tillema H.H. Peer assessment for learning from a social perspective: The influence of interpersonal variables and structural features. Educational Research Review 2009, 4(1):41-54. 10.1016/j.edurev.2008.11.002.
64. Van Zundert M., Sluijsmans D., Van Merriënboer J. Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction 2010, 20(4):270-279. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004.
65. Vass E. Friendship and collaborative creative writing in the primary classroom. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2002, 18(1):102-110. 10.1046/j. 0266-4909.2001.00216.x.
66. Wang J., Imbrie P.K. "Students" peer evaluation calibration through the administration of vignettes. Paper presented at the 2010 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition 2010, June.