Peer Assessment Using Criteria or Comparative Judgement? A Replication Study on the Learning Effect of Two Peer Assessment Methods

Abstract

AbstractVarious ways exist in which students can assess the work of their peers as for instance by using a criteria list or by making comparative judgements. Up to now, only two studies examined the effect of both peer assessment methods on the quality of feedback and students’ performance. The study of Bouwer and colleagues (2018) provides evidence in favor of comparative judgement in the context of writing in English in higher education. Results of Stuulen and colleagues (2022) point to the opposite. However, their study focused on writing in Dutch in secondary education. Hence, it is questionable to what extent the results of Bouwer and colleagues regarding the learning effect of both peer assessment methods can be generalized to other contexts and subjects. Therefore, this study conceptually replicated the Bouwer et al.-study in the context of secondary education (problem-solving in physics, writing in French) and university education (scientific reporting of statistical information). Students’ feedback and performance after the peer assessment intervention were measured. Results showed that peer assessment method did not impact students’ performance in any of the samples. Some differences between peer assessment conditions were found regarding the quantity and the content of the peer feedback but these replicated the findings of the original study only to a limited extent. Explanations and implications of these findings for peer assessment and for the role of conceptual replications are discussed.