ASSESSING PEER EVALUATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PEER EVALUATION METHODS USED IN AN ENGINEERING DESIGN COURSE

Abstract

Peer evaluation is one way to address group issues in undergraduate teams while at the same time providing feedback and assessment. Two common evaluation methods (point- and rubric-based peer evaluation) are examined and compared in terms of student perception within a University of British Columbia second year mechanical engineering design course. As part of normal course requirements, 118 students in 20 teams completed two full-time multi-week design projects with six regularly-spaced peer evaluations. Student feedback was gathered through two online surveys. Students expressed a slight preference for the rubric style evaluation, citing increased fairness and helpfulness in the feedback. Regardless of evaluation approach, student perceptions of peer evaluation were statistically unrelated to external factors including GPA, gender, and Myers-Briggs personality type. The findings suggest, at least in the student mind, that the use of peer evaluation as a design project assessment tool is fair and unbiased. Additional survey data show students see peer evaluation as a useful tool in undergraduate team design projects and that they feel more comfortable with the prospect of engaging in peer evaluation in the workplace in future as a result.