Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 346

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

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

Topping, Keith·2006·Innovation and Change in Professional Education
DOI 10.1007/0-306-48125-1_4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/0-306-48125-1_4

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Research works printed but not linked: 163

  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.
  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.
  3. 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. · doi:10.1080/00220671.1997.10543773
  4. 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. · DOI
  5. Bernadin, H. J., & Beatty, R. W. (1984). Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  6. Birenbaum, M., & Dochy, F. (Eds.). (1996). Alternatives in assessment of achievement, learning processes and prior knowledge. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
  7. Birkeland, T. S. (1986). Variations of feedback related to teaching paragraph structure to technicians. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 4362.
  8. 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. · DOI
  9. Boud, D. (1989). The role of self-assessment in student grading. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 14(1), 20–30. · DOI
  10. Boud, D. (1990). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education, 15(1), 101–111. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Boud, D. (Ed.). (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London & Philadelphia: Kogan Page.
  12. Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society, Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (Eds.). (2001). Peer learning in Higher Education: Learning from and with each other. London & Philadelphia: Kogan Page.
  14. Bouton, K., & Tutty, G. (1975). The effect of peer-evaluated student compositions on writing improvement. The English Record, 3, 64–69.
  15. 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.
  16. Brown, S., & Dove, P. (1991). Self and Peer Assessment. Birmingham: Standing Conference on Educational Development (SCED).
  17. Brown, S., & Knight, P. (1994). Assessing Learners in Higher Education. London: Kogan Page.
  18. Burnett, W., & Cavaye, G. (1980). Peer assessment by fifth year students of surgery. Assessment in Higher Education, 5(3), 273–287. · DOI
  19. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245–281. · DOI · Paper page
  20. 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. · DOI
  21. 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.
  22. Byrd, D. R. (1994). Peer editing: Common concerns and applications in the foreign language classroom. Unterrichtspraxis, 27(1), 119. · DOI
  23. 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.
  24. 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.
  25. Cicchetti, D. V. (1982). On peer review — We have met the enemy and he is us. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5(2), 205–206. · DOI
  26. Cohen, E. G. (1982). Expectation states and interracial interaction in school settings. Annual Review of Sociology, 8, 209–235. · DOI
  27. 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. · DOI
  28. 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.
  29. Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 37(4), 346–355. · DOI
  30. Davis, J. K., & Rand, D. C. (1980). Self-grading versus instructor grading. Journal of Educational Research, 73(4), 207–11. · DOI
  31. 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. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Downing, T., & Brown, I. (1997). Learning by cooperative publishing on the World Wide Web. Active Learning, 7, 14–16.
  33. Dweck, C. S., & Bush, E. S. (1976). Sex differences in learned helplessness: Differential debilitation with peer and adult evaluators. Developmental Psychology, 12(2), 1. · DOI
  34. 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. · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2365149
  35. 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. · DOI · Paper page
  36. Falchikov, N. (1993). Group process analysis — Self and peer assessment of working together in a group. Educational & Training Technology International, 30(3), 275–284. · DOI
  37. Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking — Developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 175–187. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Falchikov, N. (2001). Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. London & New York: Routledge Falmer.
  39. Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395–430. · DOI · Paper page
  40. 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. · DOI
  41. 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. · doi:10.1177/105960118901400207
  42. 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. · DOI
  43. 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. · DOI
  44. 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.
  45. 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. · DOI
  46. Freeman, M. (1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289–300. · DOI · Paper page
  47. Fry, S. A. (1990). Implementation and evaluation of peer marking in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 15, 177–189. · DOI
  48. 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. · DOI
  49. 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. · DOI
  50. Gaier, E. L. (1961). Student self assessment of final course grades. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 98(1), 63–67. · DOI
  51. 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.
  52. Gere, A. R., & Abbot, R. D. (1985). Talking about writing: The language of writing groups. Research in the Teaching of English, 19, 362–379. · DOI
  53. Goldfinch, J. (1994). Further developments in peer assessment of group projects. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 19(1), 29–35. · DOI
  54. Graner, M. H. (1985). Revision techniques: Peer editing and the revision workshop. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 109.
  55. Griffee, D. T. (1995). A longitudinal study of student feedback: Self-assessment, Course Evaluation and Teacher Evaluation. Longman: Birmingham, Alabama.
  56. Haaga, D. A. F. (1993). Peer review of term papers in graduate psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 20(1), 28–32. · DOI
  57. 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. · DOI
  58. 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. · DOI
  59. Herman, J., Gearhart, M., & Baker, E. (1993). Assessing writing portfolios: Issues in the validity and meaning of scores. Educational Assessment, 1(3), 201–224. · doi:10.1207/s15326977ea0103_2
  60. Heun, L. R. (1969). Speech Rating as Self-Evaluative Behavior: Insight and the Influence of Others. PhD Dissertation, Southern Illinois University.
  61. Heywood, J. (1988). Assessment in higher education. Chichester: John Wiley.
  62. 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.
  63. 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.
  64. Hughes, I. E. (1995). Peer assessment. Capability, 1(3), 39–43.
  65. Hughes, I. E., & Large, B. J. (1993a). Staff and peer-group assessment of oral communication skills. Studies in Higher Education, 18, 379–385. · DOI
  66. Hughes, I. E., & Large, B. J. (1993b). Assessment of students’ oral communication skills by staff and peer groups. New Academic, 2(3), 10–12.
  67. 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.
  68. 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. · doi:10.1016/s0169-8141(01)00039-7
  69. 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. · DOI
  70. Kaye, M. M., & Dyason, M. D. (1999). Achieving a competitive focus through self-assessment. Total Quality Management, 10(3), 373–390. · doi:10.1080/0954412997893
  71. Koretz, D., Stecher, B., Klein, S., & Mc Caffrey, D. (1994). The Vermont portfolio assessment program: Findings and implications. Educational Measurement, 13(3), 5–16. · DOI · Paper page
  72. Korman, M., & Stubblefield, R. L. (1971). Medical school evaluation and internship performance. Journal of Medical Education, 46, 670–673.
  73. Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 279–308. · DOI · Paper page
  74. 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.
  75. 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.
  76. 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.
  77. Lee, B. (1999). Self-assessment for pupils with learning difficulties. Slough UK: National Foundation for Educational Research.
  78. 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. · DOI
  79. 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. · DOI
  80. 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.
  81. 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.
  82. 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. · doi:10.2307/1510289
  83. Longhurst, N., & Norton, L. S. (1997). Self-assessment in coursework essays. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(4), 319–330. · DOI
  84. 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.
  85. MacKenzie, L. (2000). Occupational therapy students as peer assessors in viva examinations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 135–147. · DOI
  86. MacLellan, E. (2001). Assessment for learning: the differing perceptions of tutors and students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 307–318. · DOI · Paper page
  87. 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. · DOI
  88. 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. · DOI
  89. 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. · DOI
  90. Marcoulides, G. A., & Simkin, M. G. (1991). Evaluating student papers: The case for peer review. Journal of Education for Business, 67, 80–83. · DOI
  91. 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. · DOI
  92. Marienau, C. (1999). Selfassessment at work: Outcomes of adult learners’ reflections on practice. Adult Education Quarterly, 49(3), 135–146. · DOI
  93. Mathews, B. P. (1994). Assessing individual contributions — Experience of peer evaluation in major group projects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 25, 19–28. · DOI
  94. 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.
  95. 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. · DOI
  96. McDonald, B. (2002). Self assessment and academic achievement. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of the West Indies, Cave Hill, Barbados, West Indies.
  97. Midgley, D. F., & Petty, M. (1983). Final report on the survey of graduate opinions on general education. Kensington: University of New South Wales.
  98. 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.
  99. Mitchell, V. W., & Bakewell, C. (1995). Learning without doing — Enhancing oral presentation skills through peer-review. Management Learning, 26, 353–366. · DOI
  100. 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. · DOI
  101. Newstead, S. E. (1996). The psychology of student assessment. The Psychologist, 9, 543–7.
  102. Newstead, S., & Dennis, I. (1994). Examiners examined. The Psychologist, 7, 216–9.
  103. 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. · doi:10.1177/0145445599233004
  104. 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. · DOI
  105. 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.
  106. 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.
  107. Olson, V. L. B. (1990). The revising processes of sixth-grade writers with and without peer feedback. Journal of Educational Research, 84(1), 1.
  108. Orpen, C. (1982). Student vs lecturer assessment of learning: A research note. Higher Education, 11, 567–572. · DOI
  109. 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.
  110. 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. · DOI · Paper page
  111. Paris, S. G., & Newman, R. S. (1990). Developmental aspects of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25, 87–102. · DOI · Paper page
  112. Paulson, E. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. A. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60–63.
  113. 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.
  114. Pond, K., Ul-Haq, R., & Wade, W. (1995). Peer review: A precursor to peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 314–323. · DOI
  115. Rada, R., Acquah, S., Baker, B., & Ramsey P. (1993). Collaborative learning and the MUCH System. Computers and Education, 20, 225–233. · DOI
  116. 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. · DOI
  117. 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.
  118. Reich, R. (1975). The effect of peer feedback on the use of specific praise in student-teaching. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37, 925.
  119. Richer, D. L. (1992). The effects of two feedback systems on first year college students’ writing proficiency. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53, 2722.
  120. 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.
  121. 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.
  122. Riley, S. M. (1995). Peer responses in an ESL writing class: Student interaction and subsequent draft revision. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 3031.
  123. 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.
  124. 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. · DOI
  125. Rogers, C. R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80s. Columbus OH: Charles E. Merrill.
  126. 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. · DOI
  127. Ross, S. (1998). Self-assessment in second language testing: A meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing, 15(1), 1–20. · DOI
  128. Rowntree, D. (1977). Assessing students: How shall we know them? London: Harper & Row.
  129. 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.
  130. Saavedra, R., & Kwun, S. K. (1993). Peer evaluation in self-managing work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 450–462. · DOI
  131. Salend, S. J., Whittaker, C. R., & Reeder, E. (1993). Group evaluation — a collaborative, peer-mediated behavior management system. Exceptional Children, 59(3), 203–209. · DOI
  132. Salomon, G., & Globerson, T. (1989). When teams do not function the way they ought to. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 89–99. · DOI · Paper page
  133. Samway, K. D. (1993). This is hard, isn’t it — children evaluating writing. Tesol Quarterly, 27(2), 233–257. · DOI
  134. Schunk, D. H. (1996). Learning theories: An educational perspective (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  135. 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. · DOI · Paper page
  136. 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. · DOI
  137. 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. · DOI
  138. Sobral, D. T. (1997). Improving learning skills: A self-help group approach. Higher Education, 33(1), 39–50. · DOI
  139. Stefani, L. A. J. (1992). Comparison of collaborative self, peer and tutor assessment in a biochemistry practical. Biochemical Education, 20(3), 148–151. · DOI
  140. Stefani, L. A. J. (1994). Peer, self and tutor assessment — Relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19(1), 69–75. · DOI · Paper page
  141. 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. · DOI
  142. 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. · DOI
  143. 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. · doi:10.1207/s15326977ea0403_4
  144. 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.
  145. 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.) · DOI · Paper page
  146. Topping, K. J. (1996b). Effective peer tutoring in further and higher education (SEDA Paper 95). Birmingham: Staff and Educational Development Association.
  147. Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in college and university. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276. · doi:10.3102/00346543068003249 · Paper page
  148. Topping, K. J. (2001a). Peer assisted learning: A practical guidefor teachers. Cambridge MA: Brookline Books.
  149. Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (Eds.). (1998). Peer-assisted learning. Mahwah NJ & London UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  150. Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A framework for consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(2), 113–132. · DOI · Paper page
  151. 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. · DOI
  152. 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. · DOI · Paper page
  153. Towler, L, & Broadfoot, P. (1992). Self-assessment in the primary school. Educational Review, 44(2), 137–151. · DOI
  154. 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.
  155. 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.
  156. Ward, M, Gruppen, L., & Regehr, G. (2002). Measuring self-assessment: Current state of the art. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 7(1), 63–80. · DOI · Paper page
  157. 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.
  158. Weaver, M. E. (1995). Using peer response in the classroom: Students’ perspectives. Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, 12, 31–37.
  159. Webb, N. M., & Farivar, S. (1994). Promoting helping behavior in cooperative small groups in middle school mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 369–395. · DOI · Paper page
  160. 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.
  161. Wolfe, L., & Smith, J. K. (1995). The consequence of consequence: Motivation, anxiety, and test performance. Applied Measurement in Education, 8, 227–242. · DOI
  162. 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.
  163. Yates, J. A. (1982). The effects of peer feedback and self-monitoring on student teachers’ use of specific praise. Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 2321.

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Topping, K.
Venue
Innovation and Change in Professional Education
Publisher
Kluwer Academic Publishers
Published
2006-01-09
Pages
55-87
DOI
10.1007/0-306-48125-1_4
OpenAlex
W53514975
Cited by
346
References
10
FWCI
48.89
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.