How Accurate Is Peer Grading?
Open accessAbstract
Previously we showed that weekly, written, timed, and peer-graded practice exams help increase student performance on written exams and decrease failure rates in an introductory biology course. Here we analyze the accuracy of peer grading, based on a comparison of student scores to those assigned by a professional grader. When students graded practice exams by themselves, they were significantly easier graders than a professional; overall, students awarded ≈25% more points than the professional did. This difference represented ≈1.33 points on a 10-point exercise, or 0.27 points on each of the five 2-point questions posed. When students graded practice exams as a group of four, the same student-expert difference occurred. The student-professional gap was wider for questions that demanded higher-order versus lower-order cognitive skills. Thus, students not only have a harder time answering questions on the upper levels of Bloom's taxonomy, they have a harder time grading them. Our results suggest that peer grading may be accurate enough for low-risk assessments in introductory biology. Peer grading can help relieve the burden on instructional staff posed by grading written answers—making it possible to add practice opportunities that increase student performance on actual exams.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Both self- and peer-evaluation of work are avenues for providing meaningful feedback without formal grading on correctness that can positively influence students' learning (Sadler and Good, 2006; Freeman et al., 2007; Freeman and Parks, 2010).
“In summary, both self- and peer-evaluation of work are avenues for providing meaningful feedback without formal grading on correctness that can positively influence students' learning (Sadler and Good, 2006; Freeman et al., 2007; Freeman and Parks, 2010).”
From Teaching More by Grading Less (or Differently) (2014) · cites this paper as Freeman and Parks, 2010
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Peer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities
Topping, K. (1998) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.2307/1170598 · Cited by 2,173 · see citing works
Student Peer Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Peer and Teacher Marks
Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543070003287 · Cited by 1,170 · see citing works
Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to Enhance Student Learning in Biology
Crowe, A., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2008) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.08-05-0024 · Cited by 629 · see citing works
Prescribed Active Learning Increases Performance in Introductory Biology
Freeman, S., O'Connor, E., Parks, J. W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D., Dirks, C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2007) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.06-09-0194 · Cited by 455 · see citing works
Self-citationHafner, J., & Hafner, P. (2003) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/0950069022000038268 · Cited by 258 · see citing works
The Exam-A-Day Procedure Improves Performance in Psychology Classes
Leeming, F. C. (2002) · Teaching of Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15328023top2903_06 · Cited by 222 · see citing works
Electronic peer review and peer grading in computer-science courses
Gehringer, E. F. (2001) · doi:10.1145/364447.364564 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Paré, D. E., & Joordens, S. (2008) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00290.x · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Cheng, K. H., Thacker, B. A., Cardenas, R. L., & Crouch, C. H. (2004) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1768555 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
PROBLEM-BASED WRITING WITH PEER REVIEW IMPROVES ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN PHYSIOLOGY
Pelaez, N. J. (2002) · AJP Advances in Physiology Education · doi:10.1152/advan.00041.2001 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Evans, A., Leeson, R., & Petrie, A. (2007) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02819.x · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Robinson, R. (2001) · The American Biology Teacher · doi:10.1662/0002-7685(2001)063[0474:cpr]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Practice versus Review Exams and Final Exam Performance
Balch, W. R. (1998) · Teaching of Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15328023top2503_3 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Using Web-Based Quizzing to Improve Exam Performance: Lessons Learned
Daniel, D. B., & Broida, J. P. (2004) · Teaching of Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15328023top3103_6 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
An Analysis of Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) in a Science Lecture Classroom
Walvoord, M. E., Hoefnagels, M. H., Gaffin, D. D., Chumchal, M. M., & Long, D. A. (2008) · The journal of college science teaching · Cited by 55 · see citing works
The effectiveness and reliability of peer‐marking in first‐year medical students
English, R. E., Brookes, S. T., AVERY, K. N. L., Blazeby, J. M., & Ben‐Shlomo, Y. (2006) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02565.x · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Unannounced Quizzes Raise Test Scores Selectively for Mid-Range Students
Graham, R. B. (1999) · Teaching of Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15328023top260406 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Calibrated Peer Review™ an Application to Increase Student Reading & Writing Skills
Robinson, R. (2001) · The American Biology Teacher · doi:10.2307/4451167 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Do Weekly Quizzes Improve Student Performance on General Biology Exams?
Haberyan, K. A. (2003) · The American Biology Teacher · doi:10.2307/4451449 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Electronic peer review and peer grading in computer-science courses
Gehringer, E. F. (2001) · ACM SIGCSE Bulletin · doi:10.1145/366413.364564 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Constructing Knowledge in the Lecture Hall.
Klionsky, D. J. (2002) · The journal of college science teaching · Cited by 42 · see citing works
A Study of the Effect of Graded Homework in a Preparatory Math Course for Electrical Engineers
Trussell, H. J., & Dietz, E. J. (2003) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00752.x · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Active Learning Is Not Enough.
Casem, M. L. (2006) · The journal of college science teaching · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Development of instructional systems for teaching an electricity and magnetism course for engineers
Marr, M. J., Thomas, E. W., Benne, M. R., Thomas, A., & Hume, R. (1999) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.19127 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
The accuracy of student grading in first-year engineering courses
van Hattum-Janssen, N., Pacheco, J. A., & Vasconcelos, R. M. (2004) · European Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1080/0304379032000157259 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Exam Frequency Comparison in Introductory Soil Science
Barbarick, K. A. (1998) · Journal of natural resources and life sciences education · doi:10.2134/jnrlse.1998.0055 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Margulies, B. J., & Ghent, C. A. (2005) · Microbiology Education · doi:10.1128/me.6.1.3-7.2005 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Using peer ranking to enhance student writing
Allain, R. J., Abbott, D., & Deardorff, D. L. (2006) · Physics Education · doi:10.1088/0031-9120/41/3/008 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Margulies, B. J., & Ghent, C. A. (2005) · Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education · doi:10.1128/154288105x14285806609214 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Increased Structure and Active Learning Reduce the Achievement Gap in Introductory Biology
Haak, D. C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., & Freeman, S. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1204820 · Cited by 959 · see citing works
Self-citationDrawing-to-Learn: A Framework for Using Drawings to Promote Model-Based Reasoning in Biology
Quillin, K., & Thomas, S. R. (2015) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.14-08-0128 · Cited by 347 · see citing works
Increased Course Structure Improves Performance in Introductory Biology
Freeman, S., Haak, D., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2011) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.10-08-0105 · Cited by 306 · see citing works
Self-citationTeaching More by Grading Less (or Differently)
Schinske, J., & Tanner, K. (2014) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.cbe-14-03-0054 · Cited by 282 · see citing works
Peer assessment in the digital age: a meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher ratings
Li, H., Xiong, Y., Zang, X., Kornhaber, M. L., Lyu, Y., Chung, K. S., & Suen, H. K. (2015) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2014.999746 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
Methods for ordinal peer grading
Raman, K., & Joachims, T. (2014) · ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD) · doi:10.1145/2623330.2623654 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Questions for Assessing Higher-Order Cognitive Skills: It's Not Just Bloom’s
Lemons, P. P., & Lemons, J. D. (2013) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.12-03-0024 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Teaching and learning programming and software engineering via interactive gaming
Tillmann, N., de Halleux, J., Xie, T., Gulwani, S., & Bishop, J. (2013) · doi:10.5555/2486788.2486941 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Facilitating human interaction in an online programming course
Warren, J. D., Rixner, S., Greiner, J., & Wong, S. B. (2014) · ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) · doi:10.1145/2538862.2538893 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Teaching and learning programming and software engineering via interactive gaming
Tillmann, N., de Halleux, J., Xie, T., Gulwani, S., & Bishop, J. (2013) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) · doi:10.1109/icse.2013.6606662 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Sun, D. L., Harris, N., Walther, G., & Baiocchi, M. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0143177 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Eesley, C. E., & Wu, L. (2020) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2020/15138 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Train, T. L., & Miyamoto, Y. (2017) · The journal of college science teaching · doi:10.2505/4/jcst17_046_04_76 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Converting a large lecture class to an active blended learning class: why, how, and what we learned
Godlewska, A. M. C., Beyer, W., Whetstone, S., Schaefli, L. M., Rose, J., Talan, B., Kamin-Patterson, S., Lamb, C., & Forcione, M. (2019) · Journal of Geography in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03098265.2019.1570090 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Raman, K., & Joachims, T. (2015) · ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S) · doi:10.1145/2724660.2724678 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Insight from Biology Program Learning Outcomes: Implications for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment
Clark, N., & Hsu, J. L. (2023) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.22-09-0177 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Davidesco, I., & Milne, C. E. (2019) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.18-12-0240 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Catch Me if I Can: Detecting Strategic Behaviour in Peer Assessment
Stelmakh, I., Shah, N. B., & Singh, A. (2021) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v35i6.16611 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Peer vs. Self-Grading of Practice Exams: Which Is Better?
Jackson, M. A., Tran, A., Wenderoth, M., & Doherty, J. H. (2018) · CBE - Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.18-04-0052 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Auto Grouping and Peer Grading System in Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)
Chiou, Y., & Shih, T. K. (2015) · International Journal of Distance Education Technologies · doi:10.4018/ijdet.2015070102 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Robust Plackett–Luce model for k-ary crowdsourced preferences
Han, B., Pan, Y., & Tsang, I. W.-H. (2017) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/s10994-017-5674-0 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Validity of peer grading using Calibrated Peer Review in a guided-inquiry, conceptual physics course
Price, E., Goldberg, F., Robinson, S., & Mckean, M. (2016) · Physical Review Physics Education Research · doi:10.1103/physrevphyseducres.12.020145 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Zhang, K. E., & Jenkinson, J. (2024) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci14030296 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Grading 600+ Students: A Case Study on Peer and Self Grading
Aniche, M., Mulder, F., & Hermans, F. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training (ICSE-SEET) · doi:10.1109/icse-seet52601.2021.00031 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Gathering evidence on e-rubrics: Perspectives and many facet Rasch analysis of rating behavior
Erguvan, I. D., & Dunya, B. A. (2021) · International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education · doi:10.21449/ijate.818151 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
All In: Understanding and Motivating Stakeholders to Create an Equitable Culture of Student Success
Weatherton, M., Ko, M. E., Nichols, E. L., Krishnan, S., & Faber, C. J. (2024) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.24-02-0065 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Peer grading system based on social relations on MOOC
He, R., Hui, L., Shih, T. K., & Chiou, Y. (2015) · International Conference on Ubi-Media Computing (UMEDIA) · doi:10.1109/umedia.2015.7297446 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Peer Assessment in Medical Student Education: A Study of Feasibility, Benefit, and Worth
DuCoin, C. G., Zuercher, H., McChesney, S., & Korndorffer, J. R. (2021) · The American surgeon · doi:10.1177/00031348211011096 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Beyond Bloom’s: Students’ Perception of Bloom’s Taxonomy and its Convolution with Cognitive Load
Phillips, A. J., Briggs, J. C., & Jensen, J. L. (2019) · Journal of Psychological Research · doi:10.30564/jpr.v1i1.421 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Addressing Bias to Improve Reliability in Peer Review of Programming Coursework
Bradley, S. (2019) · Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research · doi:10.1145/3364510.3364523 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
News from the Funding Front: Upcoming Opportunities, Proposals Welcomed
Vasaly, H. L., Herrera, J., Sullivan, C. H., & Denniston, K. J. (2013) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.12-12-0213 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Exploring usage of summative peer assessments in engineering education
Petrović, J., & Pale, P. (2022) · Annual Conference of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI) · doi:10.5821/conference-9788412322262.1277 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Teaching and Assessment of Clinical Reasoning Skills in a Case-Based Veterinary Cardiology Elective
Klehm, C. D., Karabulut‐Ilgu, A., & Tropf, M. A. (2024) · Journal of Veterinary Medical Education · doi:10.3138/jvme-2024-0017 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Who Makes the Grade? Research Comparing Self, Peer and Instructor Grades in College
Atkinson, K. M., Sanchez, C. E., Koenka, A. C., Moshontz, H., & Cooper, H. (2018) · International Research in Higher Education · doi:10.5430/irhe.v3n3p1 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Article Increased Course Structure Improves Performance in Introductory Biology
Freeman, S., Haak, D. C., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2010)
Self-citationHow to Hollow Out an Education
Davis, J. (2014) · Advances in higher education and professional development book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-5051-0.ch008
Peer grading exams with video rubrics
Lupoli, S. (2016) · IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) · doi:10.1109/fie.2016.7757599
Integration and Evaluation of Peer Grading in a Graduate-level Engineering Design Course
Morris, E., & McAdams, D. (2017) · ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition · doi:10.18260/1-2--28563
Hendrickson, H. P. (2015) · Deep Blue (University of Michigan)
Condoning Free Loafers: What Do Role, Care, and Justice Have to Do with it?
Phillips, K. L., & Wildermuth, C. D. M. E. S. (2018) · Journal of Academic Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10805-018-9314-5
Methods for Ordinal Peer GradingPreprint
Raman, K., & Joachims, T. (2014) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1404.3656
Authentic Learning Digital Transformation and Innovations
Rajaram, K. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-9201-8_6 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Jesus, M. M. D., Hobbs, K. S., Adams, P. E., Ammamoo, E., Costello, R. A., Cotner, S. H., Creech, C., Driessen, E. P., Hammarlund, S. P., Foster‐Hartnett, D., et al. (2026) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.25-07-0154
Beyond Assessment: The Pedagogical Role of Digital Quizzes in Engineering Education
Karunaratne, T., Enoksson, F., Davis, R. L., Land, A., Bern, C., & Blomstervall, J. Y. (2026) · IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) · doi:10.1109/educon67543.2026.11574346
- Authors
- Freeman, S., & Parks, J. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Freeman, Scott
- Venue
- CBE—Life Sciences Education
- Published
- 2010-12
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 482-488
- ISSN
- 1931-7913 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2995766
- OpenAlex
- W1994964814
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 12.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- CBE—Life Sciences Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Washington
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and Assessment
- Keywords
- peer grading, grading accuracy, practice tests, Bloom's taxonomy, higher-order thinking skills, introductory biology, low-stakes assessment, grading workload
- MeSH terms
- Biology, Curriculum, Educational Measurement, Peer Group, Students
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
