Exploring the value of peer assessment

Research output: Contribution to journalConference article

Abstract

We have collected peer-assessment (PA) and self-assessment (SA) data from two resident sections of a software construction course. This course is a core requirement in a graduate program in software engineering at a large research university. While the body of research gives strong evidence that there are many benefits to implementing peer and self-assessment, concerns remain. Two concerns are that students will inflate their evaluation of themselves and that they may collude to give each other high ratings ("cronyism"). These concerns motivated this exploratory study of student bias in peer and self-assessment in a graduate engineering program. Our results confirm previous research that students tend to rate themselves higher than their peers, but we found no evidence of cronyism.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings
Volume2016-June
StatePublished - Jun 26 2016
Event123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition - New Orleans, United States
Duration: Jun 26 2016Jun 29 2016

Fingerprint

Students
Software engineering

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Engineering(all)

Cite this

@article{aad46080399e453ebc4aac2544f0641e,
title = "Exploring the value of peer assessment",
abstract = "We have collected peer-assessment (PA) and self-assessment (SA) data from two resident sections of a software construction course. This course is a core requirement in a graduate program in software engineering at a large research university. While the body of research gives strong evidence that there are many benefits to implementing peer and self-assessment, concerns remain. Two concerns are that students will inflate their evaluation of themselves and that they may collude to give each other high ratings ({"}cronyism{"}). These concerns motivated this exploratory study of student bias in peer and self-assessment in a graduate engineering program. Our results confirm previous research that students tend to rate themselves higher than their peers, but we found no evidence of cronyism.",
author = "Richmond, {Sally Sue} and Kailasam Satyamurthy and Defranco-Tommarello, {Joanna F.}",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "26",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2016-June",
journal = "ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings",
issn = "2153-5965",

}

Exploring the value of peer assessment. / Richmond, Sally Sue; Satyamurthy, Kailasam; Defranco-Tommarello, Joanna F.

In: ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, Vol. 2016-June, 26.06.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalConference article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Exploring the value of peer assessment

AU - Richmond, Sally Sue

AU - Satyamurthy, Kailasam

AU - Defranco-Tommarello, Joanna F.

PY - 2016/6/26

Y1 - 2016/6/26

N2 - We have collected peer-assessment (PA) and self-assessment (SA) data from two resident sections of a software construction course. This course is a core requirement in a graduate program in software engineering at a large research university. While the body of research gives strong evidence that there are many benefits to implementing peer and self-assessment, concerns remain. Two concerns are that students will inflate their evaluation of themselves and that they may collude to give each other high ratings ("cronyism"). These concerns motivated this exploratory study of student bias in peer and self-assessment in a graduate engineering program. Our results confirm previous research that students tend to rate themselves higher than their peers, but we found no evidence of cronyism.

AB - We have collected peer-assessment (PA) and self-assessment (SA) data from two resident sections of a software construction course. This course is a core requirement in a graduate program in software engineering at a large research university. While the body of research gives strong evidence that there are many benefits to implementing peer and self-assessment, concerns remain. Two concerns are that students will inflate their evaluation of themselves and that they may collude to give each other high ratings ("cronyism"). These concerns motivated this exploratory study of student bias in peer and self-assessment in a graduate engineering program. Our results confirm previous research that students tend to rate themselves higher than their peers, but we found no evidence of cronyism.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84983298713&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84983298713&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference article

VL - 2016-June

JO - ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

JF - ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings

SN - 2153-5965

ER -