Peer Assessment in Small Groups: A Comparison of Methods

By D. Baker. 2008

88 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

The Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness: Development of a Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale for Self and Peer Evaluation (2012, methodology): “Any method that forces students to differentiate ratings or rankings of team members can be criticized as threatening team cohesiveness or risking team members’ colluding so that no team member gets a better score (Baker, 2008).”
The effects of gender on group work process and achievement: an analysis through self‐ and peer‐assessment (2014, methodology): “Using peerassessment for formative purposes has been recommended (Fellenz, 2006), as peer feedbacks during the process of group work can be expected to generate a student’s progress in learning (Druskat & Wolff, 1999; Hernandez, 2002; Baker, 2008).”
Assessing Teamwork Skills for Assurance of Learning Using CATME Team Tools (2014, background): “Although empirical research on BARS rating formats has been mixed (Baker, 2008; MacDonald & Sulsky, 2009), among the advantages of BARS scales are that they provide specific descriptors of observable behaviors at different levels of performance, which may reduce rater ambiguity about what rating is…”