The reliability, effectiveness, and benefits of peer assessment in college EFL speaking classrooms: Student and teacher perspectives

Abstract

This study evaluated the reliability, effectiveness, and benefits of peer assessment in Chinese college English speaking classrooms. The participants included 30 English major college students as peer assessors and eight experienced college English teachers as teacher assessors. Both peer and teacher assessors were invited to score 34 English speech samples holistically and provide qualitative comments on the accuracy and fluency of each speaking sample. First, using generalizability theory as a framework, this study examined the variability and reliability of holistic scores assigned by peer in contrast to teacher assessors. Second, it analyzed the qualitative comments made by peer in contrast to teacher assessors. Finally, it analyzed the responses to open-ended questions answered by the assessment receivers about their perceived effectiveness of the qualitative comments on their speeches, and peer and teacher assessors about their perceived benefits of peer assessment in college English speaking classrooms. The results indicated that the reliability of up to two peer assessors’ holistic scoring is equivalent to that of one teacher assessor’s scoring; further, qualitative comments made by peer and teacher assessors were similarly effective; finally, peer assessment is beneficial for assessment receivers and peer assessors. Implications for college EFL teachers and students are discussed.