How many heads are better than one? The reliability and validity of teenagers' self‐ and peer assessments

Abstract

Self‐ and peer assessments are becoming more popular in classrooms, but there are few data on the reliability and validity of such assessments performed by school children. Because these factors are greatly affected by the number of raters, we conducted two studies to determine the rating behaviours of teenagers in self‐ and peer assessments, and how the number of raters influences the reliability and validity of self‐ and peer assessments. The first study involved 116 seventh graders (the first grade of middle school), where students individually playing musical recorders were subject to self‐ and peer assessments. The second study involved 110 eighth graders, with Web pages constructed by students being subject to self‐ and peer assessments. Generalizability theory and criterion‐related validity were used to obtain the reliability and validity coefficients of the self‐ and peer ratings. Analyses of variance were used to compare differences in self‐ and peer ratings between low‐ and high‐achieving students. The coefficients of reliability and validity increased with the number of raters in both studies, reaching the acceptable levels of 0.80 and 0.70, respectively, with 3 or 4 raters in the first study (involving assessments of individual performance) and with 14–17 raters in the second study (involving assessments of group work). Furthermore, low‐ and high‐achieving students tended to over‐ and underestimate the quality of their work in self‐assessment, respectively. The discrepancy between the ratings of students and experts was higher in group‐work assessments then in individual‐work assessments. The results have both theoretical and practical implications for researchers and teachers.

Increasing anonymity in peer assessment by using classroom response technology within face-to-face higher education

“…peer pressure, will increase with the immediacy of its members (their proximity in space or time), as is the case in a face-to-face classroom setting. Despite the various indications that these interpersonal variables might play a significant role in causing a lack of accuracy, reliability and acceptance of peer assessment (Falchikov 2003;Sung et al 2010), the question of how we can decrease these undesirable social effects has to date hardly been studied.…”

“…First, criterion related validity was tested by calculating the correlation between students' scores and teachers' scores in correspondence to Falchikov and Goldfinch (2000) and Sung et al (2010). Second, a paired sample t-test was conducted to find out if the mean score given by the students differs from the mean score given by the teacher.…”

“…Moreover Boud (1995) highlights the deeply emotional nature of assessment processes and this is especially the case in the context of in-class activities. In a public peer assessment setting for example, peer pressure might cause a lack of accuracy and reliability of the assessment (Falchikov 2003;Sung et al 2010), since it can induce different social behaviors such as giving high ratings to friends or to dominant group members. It is therefore vital to take into account students' perceptions of peer pressure, their feelings of comfort during peer assessment and their overall attitudes towards this kind of evaluation when implementing in education.…”

What if pupils can assess their peers anonymously? A quasi-experimental study

“…As the interplay of interpersonal variables is inherent to peer assessment practices and this process influences the assessment outcome, it has been stated that decreasing negative social effects such as peer pressure is desirable (Harris & Brown, 2013;Raes et al, 2013;Sung, Chang, Chang, & Yu, 2010). Several theories predict that this decrease can be obtained by making the assessment procedure anonymous, enabling pupils to assess each other without revealing their identity (Ainsworth et al, 2011;Deutsch & Gerard, 1955;Latané, 1981).…”

“…To measure and compare the validity of both peer assessment interventions in secondary education, the criterion related validity was tested by calculating the correlation between pupils' scores and teachers' scores in correspondence to Falchikov & Goldfinch (2000) and Sung, Chang, Chang, and Yu (2010). In the control condition where the pupils had to raise cards, the correlation between the pupils' scores and the teachers' scores was 0.93, which is exceptionally high (Falchikov & Goldfinch, 2000;Sung et al, 2010). In the experimental condition where pupils gave their score by means of CRT, the correlation was only .42, which is rather low.…”