Self and Peer Assessment in School and University: Reliability, Validity and Utility

  • Keith Topping

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abson, D. (1994). The effects of peer evaluation on the behaviour of undergraduate students working in tutorless groups. In H. C. Foot, C. J. Howe, A. Anderson, A. K. Tolmie, & D. A. Warden (Eds.), Group and Interactive Learning (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 153–158). Southampton & Boston: Computational Mechanics.Google Scholar
  2. Arnold, L., Willoughby, L., Calkins, V., Gammon, L., & Eberhart, G. (1981). Use of peer evaluation in the assessment of medical students. Journal of Medical Education, 56, 35–42.Google Scholar
  3. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C. C., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effects of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213–238.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, J. E., & Hixon, J. E. (1997). Effects of grade level and subject on student test score predictions. Journal of Educational Research, 90(3), 170–174.Google Scholar
  5. Bergee, M. J. (1993). A comparison of faculty, peer, and self-evaluation of applied brass jury performances. Journal of Research in Music Education, 41, 19–27.Google Scholar
  6. Bernadin, H. J., & Beatty, R. W. (1984). Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  7. Birenbaum, M., & Dochy, F. (Eds.). (1996). Alternatives in assessment of achievement, learning processes and prior knowledge. Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  8. Birkeland, T. S. (1986). Variations of feedback related to teaching paragraph structure to technicians. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 4362.Google Scholar
  9. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blatchford, P. (1997). Pupils’ self assessments of academic attainment at 7, 11 and 16 years: Effects of sex and ethnic group. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 169–184.Google Scholar
  11. Boersma, G. (1995). Improving student self-evaluation through authentic assessment. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 393 885.Google Scholar
  12. Boud, D. (1989). The role of self-assessment in student grading. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 14(1), 20–30.Google Scholar
  13. Boud, D. (1990). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education, 15(1), 101–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boud, D. (Ed.). (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London & Philadelphia: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  15. Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society, Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167.Google Scholar
  16. Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (Eds.). (2001). Peer learning in Higher Education: Learning from and with each other. London & Philadelphia: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  17. Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (1989). Quantitative studies of student self-assessment in higher education: A critical analysis of findings. Higher Education, 18(5), 529–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bouton, K., & Tutty, G. (1975). The effect of peer-evaluated student compositions on writing improvement. The English Record, 3, 64–69.Google Scholar
  19. Brock, M. N. (1993). A comparative study of computerized text analysis and peer tutoring as revision aids for ESL writers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 54, 912.Google Scholar
  20. Brown, S., & Dove, P. (1991). Self and Peer Assessment. Birmingham: Standing Conference on Educational Development (SCED).Google Scholar
  21. Brown, S., & Knight, P. (1994). Assessing Learners in Higher Education. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  22. Burnett, W., & Cavaye, G. (1980). Peer assessment by fifth year students of surgery. Assessment in Higher Education, 5(3), 273–287.Google Scholar
  23. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245–281.Google Scholar
  24. Burke, R. J. (1969). Some preliminary data on the use of self-evaluations and peer ratings in assigning university course grades. Journal of Educational Research, 62(10), 444–448.Google Scholar
  25. Byard, V. (1989). Power Play: The Use and Abuse of Power Relationships in Peer Critiquing. Paper presented to Annual meeting of the conference on college composition and communication, Seattle WA, March 16–18 1989.Google Scholar
  26. Byrd, D. R. (1994). Peer editing: Common concerns and applications in the foreign language classroom. Unterrichtspraxis, 27(1), 119.Google Scholar
  27. Califano, L. Z. (1987). Teacher and peer editing: Theireffects on students’ writing as measured by t-unit length, holistic scoring, and the attitudes of fifth and sixth grade students. Dissertation Abstracts International. 49(10), 2924.Google Scholar
  28. Catterall, M. (1995). Peer learning research in marketing. In S. Griffiths, K. Houston, & A. Lazenblatt (Eds.), Enhancing student learning through peer tutoring in higher education: Section3 — Implementing. (1sted., Vol. 1, pp. 54–62). Coleraine, NI: University of Ulster.Google Scholar
  29. Chaudron, C. (1983). Evaluating Writing: Effects of Feedback on Revision. Paper presented at the Annual TESOL Convention (17th, Toronto, Ontario, March 16–19, 1983).Google Scholar
  30. Cicchetti, D. V. (1982). On peer review — We have met the enemy and he is us. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5(2), 205–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Cicchetti, D. V. (1991). The reliability of peer-review for manuscript and grant submissions — A cross-disciplinary investigation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14(1), 119–134.Google Scholar
  32. Cohen, E. G. (1982). Expectation states and interracial interaction in school settings. Annual Review of Sociology, 8, 209–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Cole, D. A. (1991). Change in self-perceived competence as a function of peer and teacher evaluation. Developmental Psychology, 27(4), 682–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Conway, R., Kember, D., Sivan, A., & Wu, M. (1993). Peer assessment of an individual’s contribution to a group project. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1),45–56.Google Scholar
  35. Cover, B. T. L. (1987). Blue-pencil workers: the effects of a peer editing technique on students’ editing skills and attitudes toward writing at the seventh grade level. Dissertation Abstracts International, 48(08), 1968.Google Scholar
  36. Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 438–481.Google Scholar
  37. Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 37(4), 346–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Davis, J. K., & Rand, D. C. (1980). Self-grading versus instructor grading. Journal of Educational Research, 73(4), 207–11.Google Scholar
  39. Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer-and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 31–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Downing, T., & Brown, I. (1997). Learning by cooperative publishing on the World Wide Web. Active Learning, 7, 14–16.Google Scholar
  41. Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040–1047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Dweck, C. S., & Bush, E. S. (1976). Sex differences in learned helplessness: Differential debilitation with peer and adult evaluators. Developmental Psychology, 12(2), 1.Google Scholar
  43. El-Koumy, A. S. A. (2001). Effects of Student Self-Assessment on Knowledge Achievement and Academic Thinking. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Integrated English Language Program-II (3rd, Cairo, Egypt, April 18–19, 2001). ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 452 731.Google Scholar
  44. Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11(2), 146–166.Google Scholar
  45. Falchikov, N. (1993). Group process analysis — Self and peer assessment of working together in a group. Educational & Training Technology International, 30(3), 275–284.Google Scholar
  46. Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking — Developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 175–187.Google Scholar
  47. Falchikov, N. (2001). Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. London & New York: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  48. Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395–430.Google Scholar
  49. Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in Higher Education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287–322.Google Scholar
  50. Farh, J., Cannella, A. A., & Bedeian, A. G. (1991). Peer ratings: The impact of purpose on rating quality and user acceptance. Group and Organization Studies, 16, 367–386.Google Scholar
  51. Fedor, D. B., & Bettenhausen, K. L. (1989). The impact of purpose, participant preconceptions, and rating level on the acceptance of peer evaluations. Group and Organization Studies, 14, 182–197.Google Scholar
  52. Fernandes, M., & Fontana, D. (1996). Changes in control beliefs in Portuguese primary school pupils as a consequence of the employment of self-assessment strategies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 301–313.Google Scholar
  53. Fontana, D., & Fernandes, M. (1994). Improvements in mathematics performance as a consequence of self-assessment in Portuguese primary-school pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 407–417.Google Scholar
  54. Franklin, C. A. (1981). Instructor versus peer feedback in microteaching on the acquisition of confrontation; illustrating, analogies, and use of examples; and question-asking teaching skills for pre-service science teachers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 2, 3565.Google Scholar
  55. Freedman, S. W. (1992). Outside-in and inside-out: Peer response groups in two ninth grade classes. Research in the Teaching of English, 26, 71–107.Google Scholar
  56. Freeman, M. (1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289–300.Google Scholar
  57. Fry, S. A. (1990). Implementation and evaluation of peer marking in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 15, 177–189.Google Scholar
  58. Frye, A. W., Richards, B. F., Bradley, E. W., & Philp, J. R. (1992). The consistency of students self-assessments in short-essay subject-matter examinations. Medical Education, 26(4), 310–316.Google Scholar
  59. Furnham, A., & Stringfield, P. (1994). Congruence of self and subordinate ratings of managerial practices as a correlate of supervisor evaluation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 67, 57–67.Google Scholar
  60. Gaier, E. L. (1961). Student self assessment of final course grades. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 98(1), 63–67.Google Scholar
  61. Gaillet, L. I. (1992). A foreshadowing of modern theories and practices of collaborative learning: The work of the Scottish rhetorician George Jardine. Paper presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Cincinnati OH March 19–21 1992.Google Scholar
  62. Gere, A. R., & Abbot, R. D. (1985). Talking about writing: The language of writing groups. Research in the Teaching of English, 19, 362–379.Google Scholar
  63. Goldfinch, J. (1994). Further developments in peer assessment of group projects. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 19(1), 29–35.Google Scholar
  64. Graner, M. H. (1985). Revision techniques: Peer editing and the revision workshop. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 109.Google Scholar
  65. Griffee, D. T. (1995). A longitudinal study of student feedback: Self-assessment, Course Evaluation and Teacher Evaluation. Longman: Birmingham, Alabama.Google Scholar
  66. Haaga, D. A. F. (1993). Peer review of term papers in graduate psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 20(1), 28–32.Google Scholar
  67. Hendrickson, J. M., Brady, M. P., & Algozzine, B. (1987). Peer-mediated testing: The effects of an alternative testing procedure in higher education. Educational and Psychological Research, 7(2), 91–102.Google Scholar
  68. Henry, S. E. (1979). Sex and locus of control as determinants of children’s responses to peer versus adult praise. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(5), 605.Google Scholar
  69. Herman, J., Gearhart, M., & Baker, E. (1993). Assessing writing portfolios: Issues in the validity and meaning of scores. Educational Assessment, 1(3), 201–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Heun, L. R. (1969). Speech Rating as Self-Evaluative Behavior: Insight and the Influence of Others. PhD Dissertation, Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
  71. Heywood, J. (1988). Assessment in higher education. Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  72. Holley, C. A. B. (1990). The effects of peer editing as an instructional method on the writing proficiency of selected high school students in Alabama. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(09), 2970.Google Scholar
  73. Hounsell, D., & McCulloch, M. (1999). Assessing skills in Scottish higher education. In E. Dunne (Ed.) The learning society: International perspectives on core skills in higher education (pp. 149–158). London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  74. Hughes, I. E. (1995). Peer assessment. Capability, 1(3), 39–43.Google Scholar
  75. Hughes, I. E., & Large, B. J. (1993a). Staff and peer-group assessment of oral communication skills. Studies in Higher Education, 18, 379–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Hughes, I. E., & Large, B. J. (1993b). Assessment of students’ oral communication skills by staff and peer groups. New Academic, 2(3), 10–12.Google Scholar
  77. Hunter, D., & Russ, M. (1995). Peer assessment in performance studies. In S. Griffiths, K. Houston, & A. Lazenblatt (Eds.), Enhancing Student Learning Through Peer Tutoring in Higher Education: Section 3 — Implementing. (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 63–65). Coleraine, NI: University of Ulster.Google Scholar
  78. Jacobs, G., & Zhang, S. (1989). Peer Feedback in Second Language Writing Instruction: Boon or Bane? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Francisco, CA, March 27–31, 1989).Google Scholar
  79. Joines, S. M. B., & Sommerich, C. M. (2001). Comparison of self-assessment and partnered-assessment as cost-effective alternative methods for office workstation evaluation. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 28(6), 327–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Karegianes, M. L., Pascarella, E. T., & Pflaum, S. W. (1980). The effects of peer editing on the writing proficiency of low-achieving tenth grade students. Journal of Educational Research, 73(4), 203–207.Google Scholar
  81. Kaye, M. M., & Dyason, M. D. (1999). Achieving a competitive focus through self-assessment. Total Quality Management, 10(3), 373–390.Google Scholar
  82. Koretz, D., Stecher, B., Klein, S., & Mc Caffrey, D. (1994). The Vermont portfolio assessment program: Findings and implications. Educational Measurement, 13(3), 5–16.Google Scholar
  83. Korman, M., & Stubblefield, R. L. (1971). Medical school evaluation and internship performance. Journal of Medical Education, 46, 670–673.Google Scholar
  84. Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 279–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lagana, J. R. (1972). The development, implementation and evaluation of a model for teaching composition which utilizes individualized learning and peer grouping. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  86. Lasater, C. A. (1994). Observation feedback and analysis of teaching practice: Case studies of early childhood student teachers as peer tutors during a preservice teaching practicum. Dissertation Abstracts International, 55, 1916.Google Scholar
  87. Lawrence, M. J. (1996). The effects of providing feedback on the characteristics of student responses to a videotaped high schoolphysics assessment. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.Google Scholar
  88. Lee, B. (1999). Self-assessment for pupils with learning difficulties. Slough UK: National Foundation for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  89. Lejk, M., & Wyvill, M. (2001). Peer assessment of contributions to a group project: A comparison of holistic and category-based approaches. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(1), 61–72.Google Scholar
  90. LeMahieu, P., Gitomer, D. H., & Eresh, J. T. (1995). Portfolios in large-scale assessment: Difficult but not impossible. Educational Measurement, 14(3), 11–16, 25-28.Google Scholar
  91. Lennon, S. (1995). Correlations between tutor, peer and self assessments of second year physiotherapy students in movement studies. In S. Griffiths, K. Houston, & A. Lazenblatt (Eds.), Enhancing Student Learning Through Peer Tutoring in Higher Education: Section 3 —Implementing. (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 66–71). Coleraine, NI: University of Ulster.Google Scholar
  92. Litwack, M. (1974). A study of the effects of authority feedback, peer feedback, and self feedback on learning selected indirect-influence teaching skills. Dissertation Abstracts International, 35, 5762.Google Scholar
  93. Lloyd, J. (1982). Reactive effects of self-assessment and self-recording on attention to task and academic productivity. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5(3), 216–27.Google Scholar
  94. Longhurst, N., & Norton, L. S. (1997). Self-assessment in coursework essays. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(4), 319–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. MacArthur, C. A., Schwartz, S. S., & Graham, S. (1991). Effects of a reciprocal peer revision strategy in special education classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 6(4), 201–210.Google Scholar
  96. MacKenzie, L. (2000). Occupational therapy students as peer assessors in viva examinations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 135–147.Google Scholar
  97. MacLellan, E. (2001). Assessment for learning: the differing perceptions of tutors and students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 307–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Magin, D. J. (2001a). Reciprocity as a source of bias in multiple peer assessment of group work. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Magin, D. J. (2001b). A novel technique for comparing the reliability of multiple peer assessments with that of single teacher assessments of group process work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(2), 139–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Magin, D., & Helmore, P. (2001). Peer and teacher assessments of oral presentation skills: How reliable are they? Studies In Higher Education, 26(3), 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Marcoulides, G. A., & Simkin, M. G. (1991). Evaluating student papers: The case for peer review. Journal of Education for Business, 67, 80–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Marcoulides, G. A., & Simkin, M. G. (1995). The consistency of peer review in student writing projects. Journal of Education for Business, 70(4), 220–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Marienau, C. (1999). Selfassessment at work: Outcomes of adult learners’ reflections on practice. Adult Education Quarterly, 49(3), 135–146.Google Scholar
  104. Mathews, B. P. (1994). Assessing individual contributions — Experience of peer evaluation in major group projects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 25, 19–28.Google Scholar
  105. McAuley, R. G., & Henderson, H. W. (1984). Results of the peer assessment program of the college of physicians and surgeons of Ontario. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 131, 557–561.Google Scholar
  106. McCurdy, B. L., & Shapiro, E. S. (1992). A comparison of teacher-monitoring, peer-monitoring, and self-monitoring with curriculum-based measurement in reading among students with learning-disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 26(2), 162–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. McDonald, B. (2002). Self assessment and academic achievement. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of the West Indies, Cave Hill, Barbados, West Indies.Google Scholar
  108. Midgley, D. F., & Petty, M. (1983). Final report on the survey of graduate opinions on general education. Kensington: University of New South Wales.Google Scholar
  109. Miller, M. (1988). Self-Assessment in students with learning handicaps. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Council for Exceptional Children (66th, Washington, DC, March 28–April 1, 1988). ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EC 210 383.Google Scholar
  110. Mills, L. (1994). Yes, It Can Work!: Portfolio Assessment with Preschoolers. Paper presented at the Association for Childhood Education International Study Conference (New Orleans, LA, March 30–April 2, 1994). ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 372 857.Google Scholar
  111. Mitchell, V. W., & Bakewell, C. (1995). Learning without doing — Enhancing oral presentation skills through peer-review. Management Learning, 26, 353–366.Google Scholar
  112. Mockford, C. D. (1994). The use of peer group review in the assessment of project work in higher education. Mentoring and Tutoring, 2(2), 45–52.Google Scholar
  113. Newstead, S. E. (1996). The psychology of student assessment. The Psychologist, 9, 543–7.Google Scholar
  114. Newstead, S., & Dennis, I. (1994). Examiners examined. The Psychologist, 7, 216–9.Google Scholar
  115. Ney, J. W. (1989). Teacher-Student Cooperative Learning in the Freshman Writing Course. ERIC Document Reproduction Service.Google Scholar
  116. Ninness, H. A. C., Ellis, J., & Ninness, S. K. (1999). Self-Assessment as a learned reinforcer during computer interactive math performance — An Experimental analysis. Behavior Modification, 23(3), 403–418.Google Scholar
  117. Ninness, H. A. C., Ninness, S. K., Sherman, S., & Schotta, C. (1998). Argumenting computer-interactive self-assessment with and without feedback. Psychological Record, 48(4), 601–616.Google Scholar
  118. O’Donnell, A. M., & Topping, K. J. (1998). Peers assessing peers: Possibilities and problems. In K. J. Topping, & S. W. Ehly (Eds.), Peer assisted learning (Chapter 14, pp. 255–278). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  119. Olson, V. L. B. (1986). The effects of revision instruction and peer response groups on the revision behaviors, quality of writing and attitude toward writing of sixth grade students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(12), 4310.Google Scholar
  120. Olson, V. L. B. (1990). The revising processes of sixth-grade writers with and without peer feedback. Journal of Educational Research, 84(1), 1.Google Scholar
  121. Orpen, C. (1982). Student vs lecturer assessment of learning: A research note. Higher Education, 11, 567–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Orr, A. (1995). Peer assessment in a practical component of physiotherapy education. In S. Griffiths, K. Houston, & A. Lazenblatt (Eds.), Enhancing Student Learning Through Peer Tutoring in Higher Education: Section 3 — Implementing. (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 72–78). Coleraine, NI: University of Ulster.Google Scholar
  123. Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(1), 23–38.Google Scholar
  124. Paris, S. G., & Newman, R. S. (1990). Developmental aspects of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25, 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Paulson, E. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. A. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60–63.Google Scholar
  127. Pierson, H. (1967). Peer and teacher correction: A comparison of the effects of two methods of teaching composition in grade 9 English classes. Unpublished doctoral thesis, New York University, New York.Google Scholar
  128. Pond, K., Ul-Haq, R., & Wade, W. (1995). Peer review: A precursor to peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 314–323.Google Scholar
  129. Rada, R., Acquah, S., Baker, B., & Ramsey P. (1993). Collaborative learning and the MUCH System. Computers and Education, 20, 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Ramsey, P. G., Carline, J. D., Blank, L. L., & Wenrich M. D. (1996). Feasibility of hospital-based use of peer ratings to evaluate the performances of practicing physicians. Academic Medicine, 71, 364–370.Google Scholar
  131. Raphael, T. E. (1986). The impact of text structure instruction and social context on students’ comprehension and production of expository text. East Lansing, MI: Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
  132. Reich, R. (1975). The effect of peer feedback on the use of specific praise in student-teaching. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37, 925.Google Scholar
  133. Richer, D. L. (1992). The effects of two feedback systems on first year college students’ writing proficiency. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53, 2722.Google Scholar
  134. Rijlaarsdam, G. (1987). Effects of peer evaluation on writing performance, writing processes, and psychological variables. Paper presented at the 38th Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Atlanta GA, March 19–21, 1987.Google Scholar
  135. Rijlaarsdam, G., & Schoonen, R. (1988). Effects of a teaching program based on peer evaluation on written composition and some variables related to writing apprehension. Amsterdam: Stichting Centrum voor Onderwijsonderzoek, Amsterdam University.Google Scholar
  136. Riley, S. M. (1995). Peer responses in an ESL writing class: Student interaction and subsequent draft revision. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 3031.Google Scholar
  137. Roberts, W. H. (1985). The effects of grammar reviews and peer-editing on selected collegiate students’ ability to write business letters effectively. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 1994.Google Scholar
  138. Rocklin, T. R., O’Donnell, A. M., & Hoist, P. M (1995). Effects and underlying mechanisms of self-adapted testing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80s. Columbus OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar
  140. Ross, J. A. (1995). Effects of feedback on student behavior in cooperative learning groups in a grade-7 math class. Elementary School Journal, 96(2), 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Ross, S. (1998). Self-assessment in second language testing: A meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing, 15(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Rowntree, D. (1977). Assessing students: How shall we know them? London: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  143. Rudd, T. J., & Gunstone, R. F. (1993). Developing self-assessment skills in grade 3 science and technology: The importance of longitudinal studies of learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (Atlanta, GA, April 15–18, 1993) and the American Educational Research Association (Atlanta, GA, April 12–16, 1993). ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 358 103.Google Scholar
  144. 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.Google Scholar
  145. Saavedra, R., & Kwun, S. K. (1993). Peer evaluation in self-managing work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 450–462.Google Scholar
  146. Salend, S. J., Whittaker, C. R., & Reeder, E. (1993). Group evaluation — a collaborative, peer-mediated behavior management system. Exceptional Children, 59(3), 203–209.Google Scholar
  147. Salomon, G., & Globerson, T. (1989). When teams do not function the way they ought to. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 89–99.Google Scholar
  148. Samway, K. D. (1993). This is hard, isn’t it — children evaluating writing. Tesol Quarterly, 27(2), 233–257.Google Scholar
  149. Schunk, D. H. (1996). Learning theories: An educational perspective (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  150. Segers, M., & Dochy, F. (2001). New assessment forms in problem-based learning: The value-added of the students’ perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 327–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Shore, T. H., Shore, L. M., & Thornton, G. C. (1992). Construct validity of self evaluations and peer evaluations of performance dimensions in an assessment center. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 42–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Sink, C. A., Barnett, J. E., & Hixon, J. E. (1991). Self-regulated learning and achievement by middle-school children. Psychological Reports, 69(3), 979–989.Google Scholar
  153. Sobral, D. T. (1997). Improving learning skills: A self-help group approach. Higher Education, 33(1), 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Stefani, L. A. J. (1992). Comparison of collaborative self, peer and tutor assessment in a biochemistry practical. Biochemical Education, 20(3), 148–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Stefani, L. A. J. (1994). Peer, self and tutor assessment — Relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19(1), 69–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. Stoddard, B., & MacArthur, C. A. (1993). A peer editor strategy — guiding learning-disabled students in response and revision. Research in the Teaching of English, 27(1), 76–103.Google Scholar
  157. Strachan, I. B., & Wilcox, S. (1996). Peer and self assessment of group work: Developing an effective response to increased enrolment in a third-year course in microclimatology. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 20(3), 343–353.Google Scholar
  158. Supovitz, J. A., MacGowan, A., & Slattery J. (1997). Assessing agreement: An examination of the interrater reliability of portfolio assessment in Rochester, New York. Educational Assessment, 4(3), 237–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Taylor, I. (1995). Understanding computer software: Using peer tutoring in the development of understanding of some aspects of computer software. In S. Griffiths, K. Houston, & A. Lazenblatt (Eds.), Enhancing Student Learning Through Peer Tutoring in Higher Education: Section 3 — Implementing. (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 87–89). Coleraine, NI: University of Ulster.Google Scholar
  160. Topping, K. J. (1996a). The effectiveness of peer tutoring infurther and higher education: A typology andreview of the literature. Higher Education, 32(3), 321–345. (Also in S. Goodlad. (Ed.). (1998). Mentoring and tutoring by students. London & Stirling VA: Kogan Page.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Topping, K. J. (1996b). Effective peer tutoring in further and higher education (SEDA Paper 95). Birmingham: Staff and Educational Development Association.Google Scholar
  162. Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in college and university. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276.Google Scholar
  163. Topping, K. J. (1999). Formative assessment of reading comprehension by computer: Advantages and disadvantages of the Accelerated Reader software. Reading OnLine (I.R.A.) [Online]. Available http://www.readingonline.org/critical/topping/ [November 4]. (hypermedia).
  164. Topping, K. J. (2001a). Peer assisted learning: A practical guidefor teachers. Cambridge MA: Brookline Books.Google Scholar
  165. Topping, K. J. (2001b). Tutoring by peers, family and volunteers. Geneva: International Bureau of Education, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). [Online] Available: http://www.ibe.unesco.org/International/Publicalions/EducationalPractices/prachomc.htm [January 1 ] (Also in translation in Chinese and Spanish).Google Scholar
  166. Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (Eds.). (1998). Peer-assisted learning. Mahwah NJ & London UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  167. Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A framework for consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(2), 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  168. Topping, K. J., & Sanders, W. L. (2000). Teacher effectiveness and computer assessment of reading: Relating value added and learning information system data. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(3), 305–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 149–169.Google Scholar
  170. Towler, L, & Broadfoot, P. (1992). Self-assessment in the primary school. Educational Review, 44(2), 137–151.Google Scholar
  171. Turner, R. F. (1981). The effects of feedback on the teaching performance of preservice teachers involved in a microteaching experience. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 3116.Google Scholar
  172. Wade, L. K. (1988). An analysis of the effects of a peer feedback procedure on the writing behavior of sixth-grade students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 50(05), 2181.Google Scholar
  173. Ward, M, Gruppen, L., & Regehr, G. (2002). Measuring self-assessment: Current state of the art. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 7(1), 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Wassef, A., Mason, G., Collins, M. L., O’Boyle, M., & Ingham, D. (1996). In search of effective programs to address students’ emotional distress and behavioral problems: Student assessment of school-based support groups. Adolescence, 31(12), 1–16.Google Scholar
  175. Weaver, M. E. (1995). Using peer response in the classroom: Students’ perspectives. Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, 12, 31–37.Google Scholar
  176. Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 13–40.Google Scholar
  177. Webb, N. M., & Farivar, S. (1994). Promoting helping behavior in cooperative small groups in middle school mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 369–395.Google Scholar
  178. Weeks, J. O., & White, M. B. (1982). Peer editing versus teacher editing: Does it make a difference?. Paper presented at Meeting of the North Carolina Council of the International Reading Association, Charlotte NC, March 7–9, 1982.Google Scholar
  179. Williams, J. (1995). Using peer assessment to enhance professional capability. In M. Yorke (Ed.), Assessing Capability in Degree and Diploma Programmes. (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 59–67). Liverpool: Centre for Higher Education Development, Liverpool John Moores University.Google Scholar
  180. Wolfe, L., & Smith, J. K. (1995). The consequence of consequence: Motivation, anxiety, and test performance. Applied Measurement in Education, 8, 227–242.Google Scholar
  181. Wright, L. (1995). All students will take more responsibility for their own learning. In S. Griffiths, K. Houston, & A. Lazenblatt (Eds.), Enhancing Student Learning Through Peer Tutoring in Higher Education: Section 3 — Implementing. (1st ed., Vol. 1, pp. 90–92). Coleraine, NI: University of Ulster.Google Scholar
  182. Yates, J. A. (1982). The effects of peer feedback and self-monitoring on student teachers’ use of specific praise. Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 2321.Google Scholar
  183. Zoller, Z., & Ben-Chaim, D. (1997). Student self-assessment in Science Examinations: Is it compatible with that of teachers? Paper presented at the meeting of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Greece, Athens, August 26–30.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keith Topping
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of DundeeScotland

Personalised recommendations