Procedural justice and the development and use of peer evaluations in business and accounting classes

Abstract

Group-based learning has been proposed as a useful addition to the accounting professor’s tool-kit. One important issue that arises in this context is how student performance should be evaluated. Some propose that student peer evaluations be included in the formal evaluation process. This study draws on procedural justice theory to identify characteristics of a peer evaluation process that may enhance student perceptions regarding the fairness of the process. Four peer evaluation forms (along with questions about the evaluation process) were administered to 669 students from three universities. The subjects included introductory business students ( n =298), upper-division accounting students ( n =209), and MBA students ( n =162). We find that students in all sample partitions (i.e. by university and by student level) prefer that: (1) student input be used in the evaluation process; (2) evaluation forms be structured; (3) evaluation forms allow for additional comments; (4) the evaluation process include mid-term feedback; and (5) peer evaluators’ identities remain confidential. Further, with the exception of students at one university, we find that students prefer that self-evaluations be included as part of the evaluation process.