Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 276

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Peer Assessment Training in Teacher Education: Effects on performance and perceptions

Sluijsmans, Dominique M. A., Brand-Gruwel, Saskia, van Merriënboer, Jeroen J. G.·2002·Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

Abstract

The implementation of peer assessment receives much attention in teacher education. This paper reports the effects of peer assessment training on the performance of student teachers. Ninety-three student teachers were randomly assigned to control groups and experimental groups. The experimental groups were trained in defining performance criteria, giving feedback and writing assessment reports. This was done through peer assessment tasks that were embedded in a redesigned course. Analyses of data derived from peer assessment reports written by the students showed that the experimental groups surpassed the control groups in the quality of the assessment skill. As a result of the training, students from the experimental groups also scored significantly higher grades for the end products of the course than students from the control groups. The results of the questionnaire showed that all students were significantly more satisfied with the redesigned course.

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 · 10.1080/0260293022000009311

Cites

1 of 1 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

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. ARTER J., 1996, Student performance assessment in an era of restructuring
  2. 10.1080/0260293990240405 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1080/03075079712331381064 · DOI
  4. CUTLER H., 1995, Assessing competence in higher education
  5. 10.1016/S0191-491X(97)86211-6 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1080/03075079912331379935 · DOI · Paper page
  7. FALCHKOV N., 1995, Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 175, 10.1080/1355800950320212 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1080/13562510120045212 · DOI
  9. 10.1080/0260293950200305 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1080/07294360123776 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1080/026029300449254 · DOI
  12. 10.1080/0260293960210301 · DOI
  13. 1995, Beroep in beweging. Beroepsproflel leraar primair onderwijs [Profession in action. Vocational training profile for the primary school teacher]
  14. 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1998.tb00617.x · DOI
  15. 10.1080/0260293960210304 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1080/02602930050025006 · DOI · Paper page
  17. RUSHTON C., 1993, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20, 75
  18. 10.1023/A:1009932704458 · doi:10.1023/a:1009932704458
  19. 10.1016/S0191-491X(01)00019-0 · DOI
  20. SLUIJSMANS D., 2000, A peer assessment model
  21. SPRANGERS M., 1989, Response shift and the retrospective pre-test
  22. 10.1080/03098269708725413 · DOI
  23. 10.1080/02602930050135130 · DOI
  24. VAN MERRIENBOER J. J. G., 1997, Training complex cognitive stills

Cited by

See all 276

Metadata

Authors
Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G.
Venue
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Published
2002-09
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
443-454
ISSN
  • 0260-2938 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-297X
OpenAlex
W2024667836
Cited by
276
References
1
FWCI
20.30
Type
journal article
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.