Analysis of the validity of peer assessment: a study in Higher Education

Authors

  • Isabel Pascual-Gómez University of Alcalá
  • Elena María Lorenzo-Llamas University of Alcalá
  • Carlos Monge-López University of Alcalá

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7203/relieve.21.1.5168

Keywords:

 Cooperative learning, self-assessment, portfolio assessment, Higher Education, peer-assessment, assessment for learning, hetero-assessment, emic perspective, rubric

Abstract

In Spain only a limited number of studies have been done regarding students evaluating their peers in higher education. The objective of this article is to analyse the way in which students that have participated in a cooperative learning project evaluated their peers. Data were collected online from a sample of 119 bachelor students that were registered in a teacher training course at the University of Alcalá. Activities were designed for both peer evaluation and self-evaluation in group work. These student evaluations were compared with ratings given by the teacher. A contrast analysis showed a statistically significant difference of 1-2 points between the mean scores, in favour of the students. Despite these overestimated values, an analysis of the content from the self-evaluation tool showed its usefulness for improving the formative assessment process for both students and teachers.

Author Biographies

Isabel Pascual-Gómez, University of Alcalá

Doctorate in Philosophy and Educational Sciences from the Complutense University of Madrid. At present she is a non-tenured lecturer in the University of Alcalá’s Department of Educational Sciences, where she teaches Research and Diagnostic Methods in Education. Her chief lines of research include university teaching assessment and educational psychology tools validation. Her postal address is: Aulario María de Guzmán. C/ San Cirilo s/n. 28804. Alcalá de Henares

Elena María Lorenzo-Llamas, University of Alcalá

Doctorate in Educational Psychology from the University of Alcalá. At present she is an associate lecturer in the University of Alcalá’s Department of Educational Sciences, where she teaches Research and Diagnostic Methods in Education. Her chief lines of research include high intelectual capacities, educational research methods, catering for diversity and inclusion, and higher education assessment methods. Her postal address is: Aulario María de Guzmán. C/ San Cirilo s/n. 28804. Alcalá de Henares (Spain).

Carlos Monge-López, University of Alcalá

Is a doctoral student of Educational Planning and Innovation. On the research staff of the University of Alcalá’s Department of Educational Sciences (area: Didactics and School Organisation), he holds a pre-doctoral FPU-UAH Doctoral Training contract. His postal address is Facultad de Educación. C/ Madrid 1. 19001. Guadalajara (Spain).

References

Alonso-Tapia, J. & Hernansaiz Garrido, H. (2013). Evaluar para el aprendizaje. Problemas en la práctica de la evaluación de competencias: el caso de la comprensión de tablas y gráficos. Assessment for learning. Difficulties in competencies practices: the case of table and graph understanding. Revista educativa Hekademos, 13, A-o VI, pp.7-18.

Andrade, H., Du, Y. & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students' writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 27(2), pp. 3-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2008.00118.x

Boud, D. & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long-term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31 (4), pp. 399-413. Disponible en http://pages.ramapo.edu/~vasishth/Learning_Outcomes/Boud+Assessment+Long-term_Learning.pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602930600679050

Bretones Román, A. (2008). Participación del alumnado de Educación Superior en su evaluación. Revista de Educación, 347, pp.181-202.

Brown, S. & Glasner, A. (2003). Evaluar en la Universidad. Problemas y nuevos enfoques. Madrid: Narcea.

Carless, D., Joughin, G. & Liu, N.F. (2006). How assessment supports learning: Learning-oriented assessment in action. Hong Kong University-Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.5790/hongkong/9789622098237.001.0001

Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S.L. (2002). Dentro / Fuera. Enseñantes que investigan. Madrid: Akal.

Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self-assessments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 11 (2), pp-144-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0260293860110206

Falchikov, N. y Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in Higher Education: a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59 (4), pp.395-430. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543059004395

Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, pp.175-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1355800950320212

Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving Assessment Through Student Involvement. Practical solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. London: Routledge-Falmer.

Gallego, B.; Sánchez, C. & Cubero, J. (2011). La a pro-alimentación y la retro-alimentación prospectiva entre iguales como estrategias para el desarrollo del pensamiento crítico y el aprendizaje autónomo. En Evalfor, Evaluar para aprender en la universidad: Experiencias innovadoras en el aprendizaje a través de la evaluación (pp. 83-97). Madrid: Bubok Publishing.

Gil Flores, J. & Padilla, T. (2009). La participación del alumnado universitario en la evaluación del aprendizaje (pp. 43-65). http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.1.12.287

Heathfield, M. (2003). Evaluación en grupo para fomentar un aprendizaje de calidad. En S. Brown, A. Glasner (Eds.) Evaluar en la universidad. Problemas y nuevos enfoques, (pp.155-166). Madrid: Narcea.

Ibarra Saiz, M.S., Rodríguez Gómez, G. & Gómez Ruíz, M.A. (2012). La evaluación entre iguales: beneficios y estrategias para su práctica en la universidad. Revista de Educación, 359, pp. 206-231.

López Pastor, V.M. (2008). Desarrollando sistemas de evaluación formativa y compartida en la docencia universitaria. Análisis de resultados de su puesta en práctica en la formación inicial del profesorado. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(3), pp. 293-311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02619760802208452

López Pastor, V.M. (Coord.) (2009). Evaluación formativa y compartida en Educación Superior. Propuestas, técnicas, instrumentos y experiencias. Madrid: Narcea.

Montero-Fleta, B. (2006). Investigación cualitativa y cuantitativa en la coevaluación: correlación profesor-alumno. En F. Watts & A. García-Carbonell, (Eds.), La evaluación compartida: investigación multidisciplinar, (pp. 31-46). Valencia: Universidad Politécnica de Valencia. Recuperado de http://www.upv.es/gie/Publicaciones.html

Morales Vallejo, P. (2008). Estadística Aplicada a las Ciencias Sociales. Madrid: Universidad Pontificia de Comillas.

Muñíz, J. & Fonseca-Pedrero, E. (2008). Construcción de instrumentos de medida para la evaluación universitaria. Revista de Investigación en Educación, 5, pp. 13-25.

Navaridas Nalda, F. (2002). La evaluación del aprendizaje y su influencia en el comportamiento estratégico del estudiante universitario. Contextos Educativos, 5, pp. 141-156.

Otero, M., Yuste, R. & Alzás, T. (2011). Coevaluación en la plataforma virtual Moodle: una propuesta práctica para la mejora del proceso de enseñanza en Educación Superior. En Evalfor, Evaluar para aprender en la universidad: Experiencias innovadoras en el aprendizaje a través de la evaluación, (pp. 62-71). Madrid: Bubok Publishing.

Panadero, E. & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9(0), pp. 129-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002

Panadero, E. & Alonso-Tapia, J. (2013). Autoevaluación: Connotaciones teóricas y prácticas. Cuándo ocurre, cómo se adquiere y qué hacer para potenciarla en nuestro alumnado. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 11 (2), pp. 551-576. Disponible en: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=293128257012

Panadero, E., Romero, M., & Strijbos, J. W. (2013). The impact of a rubric and friendship on construct validity of peer assessment, perceived fairness and comfort, and performance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39(4), 195-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.005

Panadero, E., Alonso-Tapia, J. & Huertas, J.A. (2014). Rubrics vs self-assessment scripts: effects on first year university students' self-regulation and performance / Rúbricas y guiones de autoevaluación: efectos sobre la autorregulación y el rendimiento de estudiantes universitarios de primer año. Infancia y Aprendizaje: Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 37(1), pp. 149-183. DOI: 10.1080/02103702.2014.88165555

Pond, K., Ul-Haq, R. & Wade, W. (1995). Peer review: a precursor to peer assessment. Innovation in Education and Training International, 32, pp. 314-323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1355800950320403

Roberts, T. S. (2006). Self, Peer and Group Assessment in E-Learning. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140-965-6

Rodríguez Gómez, G. & Ibarra Saiz, M.S. (Eds.) (2011). e-Evaluación orientada al e-Aprendizaje estratégico en Educación Superior. Madrid: Narcea.

Rodríguez Gómez, G., Ibarra Sáiz, M.S. & García Jiménez, E. (2013). Autoevaluación, evaluación entre iguales y coevaluación: conceptualización y práctica en las universidades españolas. Revista de Investigación en Educación, 11 (2), pp.198-210. Recuperado de http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=4734976

Sadler, P.M. & Good, E. (2006). The impact of self- and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(1), pp. 1-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea1101_1

Sanmartí, N. (2007). Evaluar para aprender: 10 ideas clave. Barcelona: Graó.

Topping, K.J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48, pp. 20-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569

Downloads

Published

2015-05-19

Issue

Vol. 21 No. 1 (2015)

Section

Special Section

License

The authors grant non-exclusive rights of exploitation of works published to RELIEVE and consent to be distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Use 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC 4.0), which allows third parties to use the published material whenever the authorship of the work and the source of publication is mentioned, and it is used for non-commercial purposes. 

    The authors can reach other additional and independent contractual agreements, for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (for example, by including it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), as long as it is clearly stated that the Original source of publication is this magazine.  

    Authors are encouraged to disseminate their work after it has been published, through the internet (for example, in institutional archives online or on its website) which can generate interesting exchanges and increase work appointments. 

   The fact of sending your paper to RELIEVE implies that you accept these conditions.