Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives

By Kwangsu Cho, Christian D. Schunn, Roy Wilson. 2006

373 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/26a692591bae818a72a33c5fd3bfc69e7735b257

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

Peer feedback on academic writing: undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance (2018, result): “On the other hand, the current study’s findings are in line with prior research by Schunn and colleagues (e.g. Cho, Schunn, and Wilson 2006).”
Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments (2010, background): “Irrespective of the findings on the reliability of peer ratings versus teacher ratings (Cho et al., 2006; Falchikov & Goldfinch, 2000; Magin, 2001; Stefani, 1994; Topping, 2003; Zhang, Johnston, & Kilic, 2008), similarity in peer and teacher ratings provides no information as to whether the ratings ”
Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis (2020, background): “Extensive research has been published on the reliability and validity of peer assessment results (e.g. Cho, Schunn, and Wilson 2006; Chang et al. 2011; Li et al. 2016).”
Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation (2014, background): “Several studies have shown that peers are capable of providing reliable feedback that is of equal value to that provided by the instructor (Cho et al., 2006; Gielen et al., 2010), although this can depend on how the process is implemented.”
Goals of peer assessment and their associated quality concepts (2011, background): “Moreover, stakeholders may differ in their opinions on the validity and reliability of peer assessment: Cho, Schunn, and Wilson ( 2006 ) describe several reasons why students often perceive peer assessment as unreliable and invalid when from the instructor’s perspective there is no problem at all.”
An inventory of peer assessment diversity (2011, methodology): “the SWORD software by Cho, Schunn, and Wilson 2006 ).”
Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work (2011, background): “Cho et al. (2006) further noted that students found comments containing praise and mitigating language to be more helpful than other types of comments.”
The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity, and educational consequences (2007, background): “Cho et al. (2006) argue that peer reviewing of writing may be a way to create more writing opportunities in college and university settings, but observes that the validity and reliability of peer-generated grades are a major concern.”
The development of science activities via on-line peer assessment: the role of scientific epistemological views (2009, background): “This conclusion concurred with the findings presented by previous studies (e.g., Cho et al. 2006; Topping 1998).”
How effective are self- and peer assessment of oral presentation skills compared with teachers’ assessments? (2012, background): “The choice of this specific number is based on the work of Hafner and Hafner (2003), who reported a large improvement in reliability when moving from a single rater to about five raters, and on the work of Dannefer et al. (2005), who concluded that at least six peers are needed to achieve a moderate”