Peer assessment in university teaching: evaluating seven course designs

By Ineke van den Berg, Wilfried Admiraal, Albert Pilot. 2006

210 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0b5e4a2447dcc9570e498f4b7e58ce8a30d42eeb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning (2009, methodology): “…assessors in assessment skills (Sluijsmans et al., 2002), (d) methods of teaching students how to provide peer feedback (Van Steendam et al., 2010), (e) the matching principles for peers (Van den Berg, Admiraal, & Pilot, 2006), and (f) teacher support for peer feedback (Van den Berg et al., 2006).”
Peer and self‐assessment in the first year of university (2011, unknown): “Berg, Admiraal, and Pilot 2006 ; Boud and Falchikov 1989 ; Falchikov and Boud 1989 ; Liu and Carless 2006 ; McDonald and Boud 2003 ; Orsmond, Merry, and Reiling 1996 , 1997 , 1998 , 2000 , 2002 ; Orsmond, Price, and Rust 2004 ).”
Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work (2011, background): “Berg et al. (2006) have further suggested that specific elements of the peer assessment context might lead to better revisions and a more positive attitude toward peer assessment, including small assessment groups of 3–4 students and face-to-face contact among assessors and those who are being…”
Student perceptions of peer assessment: an interdisciplinary study (2014, background): “…capacity for critical analysis (Boyle and Nicol 2003; Cavas et al. 2010; Dochy, Segers, and Sluijsmans 1999; LindblomYlänne, Pihlajamäki, and Kotkas 2006; Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006; Topping 2009; Topping et al. 2000; Van den Berg, Amiraal, and Pilot 2007; Vickerman 2009; Wen and Tsai 2006).”
Students’ views of assessment in project-led engineering education: findings from a case study in Portugal (2012, background): “Besides this, it also encourages the development of student autonomy and higher‐order thinking skills (van den Berg 2006 ), fostered by self‐reflection and metacognition processes, with positive implications for student self‐regulation and improvement of learning (Zimmerman 1990 ; Vickerman 2009 ”
A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum (2010, background): “( 2006 ) studied amongst other design features the effect of the weight teachers attribute to peer feedback in their teaching, as well as the effect of different matching principles of peers.”
Assessment revisited: a review of research in Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education (2016, background): “Peer-assessment is appreciated by the students for many reasons; it is useful and effective because it allows interaction between students (van den Berg, Admiraal, and Pilot 2006) and produces formative feedback (Patton 2012).”
Designing student peer assessment in higher education: analysis of written and oral peer feedback (2006, background): “There have been many studies on the results of PA in relation to grading and student satisfaction, as well as on the effective organization of PA in higher education (Topping, 1998; Van den Berg et al ., 2006).”
Dialogue within peer feedback processes: clarification and negotiation of meaning (2018, background): “Apart from resonating with the recommendation of combining written and oral feedback in peer assessment (Van den Berg et al., 2006), our findings emphasise the voice of the provider who wanted to get feedback from both the recipient and the teacher so as to enhance their capacities to make…”
Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: an attempt to deepen learning? (2009, background): “Van Den Berg ( 2006b ) extends this to suggest that formative and summative assessment of students own and others work has many potential benefits to learning.”
An inventory of peer assessment diversity (2011, methodology): “Finally, we grouped the 20 resulting variables into five clusters, building on an earlier clustering by van den Berg, Admiraal, and Pilot (2006a).”
Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work (2018, background): “…and pedagogical purposes of peer assessment (Dochy et al. 1999; Liu and Carless 2006; Panadero 2016) and consider both the receiving and the giving of peer feedback to be important for learning (van den Berg et al. 2006), particularly for the development of evaluative judgement (Nicol et al. 2014).”