Validity of peer grading using Calibrated Peer Review in a guided-inquiry, conceptual physics course

Edward Price,Fred Goldberg,Steve Robinson,Michael Mckean

doi:10.1103/physrevphyseducres.12.020145

Abstract

Calibrated Peer Review is an effective and practical way to engage students in the science practices of constructing and evaluating explanations.

Highlights

Constructing and evaluating explanations are important science practices, and developing students’ capabilities with these practices is a goal for many physics educators and physics education researchers
Our research demonstrates that Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) can be an effective way to explicitly include the science practices of constructing and evaluating explanations into large classes without placing a significant burden on the instructor
A complete comparison is in Ref. [28]; here, we focus on how students engage in science practices related to constructing and evaluating written explanations for physical phenomena

Summary

Introduction

Constructing and evaluating explanations are important science practices, and developing students’ capabilities with these practices is a goal for many physics educators and physics education researchers. The use of peer review and grading raises questions about the appropriateness of students grading each other. We used CPR in guided-inquiry, conceptual physics courses for preservice elementary teachers and general education students. This paper describes our use of CPR to engage students in the science practices of constructing and evaluating explanations of natural phenomenon, and evaluates the validity of the peer evaluation process in CPR. With important implications for the preparation of future teachers, the National Research Council’s Framework for K-12 Science Education [12] and the subsequent generation science standards (NGSS) [13] emphasize the integration of science practices and science content.

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion