Self and Peer Assessment in School and University: Reliability, Validity and Utility

By Keith Topping. 2003

366 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7fa8f39710dc598b2836719ccbed92e804df9b41

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

Self-assessment in the process of self-regulated learning and its relationship with academic achievement (2020, background): “Pedagogically, it implies that it is better to teach students to prepare for self-assessment as early as possible when engaging in a learning task, rather than hold self-assessment until the task is completed (Topping 2003; Andrade and Valtcheva 2009).”
Online peer assessment: effects of cognitive and affective feedback (2011, background): “…has amassed substantial evidence on the cognitive (Nelson and Schunn 2009; Tseng and Tsai 2007), pedagogical (Falchikov and Blythman 2001), meta-cognitive (Butler and Winne 1995; Topping 1998), and affective benefits (Strijbos et al. 2010) of peer assessment on student learning (Topping 2003).”
How effective are self- and peer assessment of oral presentation skills compared with teachers’ assessments? (2012, background): “Topping (2003) points to the widespread approach in discussions of the reliability of selfand peer assessments compared with assessment by teachers, stressing that the a priori assumption that assessment by a teacher is more reliable and more valid can be doubted in some contexts.”
A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum (2010, background): “Secondly, research in higher education shows that students often perceive peer feedback as more understandable and more useful because fellow students ‘are on the same wavelength’ (Topping, 2003 ).”
Goals of peer assessment and their associated quality concepts (2011, background): “In some cases, this use of peer assessment in group work is explicitly linked to curricular goals, such as learning to cooperate and manage group projects (Topping 2003 ), and so peer assessment may be a tool to assess these goals (see goal 2), or to support the acquisition of them (see goal 3).”
The assessment cycle: a model for learning through peer assessment (2016, background): “A number of reviews (e.g. Dochy, Segers, and Sluijsmans 1999; Topping 2003) provide insight into important aspects of peer and self-assessment, such as calibration, bias, training and learning.”
Trends in Peer Learning (2005, background): “The benefits for both parties have been extensively documented, more in higher education (Topping, 1998b) than in schools (Topping, 2003a), but the latter is growing.”
Effects of self-assessment on self-regulated learning and self-efficacy: Four meta-analyses (2017, background): “First, there is a number of studies about the effects of selfassessment on SRL that are not included in the abovementioned narrative reviews by Topping (2003) and Brown and Harris (2013).”
Peer assessment without assessment criteria (2014, background): “The promotion and valuing of peer learning (Slavin 1991) is a common motivation for implementing and studying peer assessment (Topping 2003; Gielen et al. 2011; Kollar and Fischer, 2010; van Steendam et al. 2010; van Zundert, Sluijsmans and van Merriënboer 2010).”
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 ”
Using formative assessment to influence self- and co-regulated learning: the role of evaluative judgement (2018, background): “Peer assessment has a similar trajectory with an earlier line of research on peer-grading accuracy (Topping, 2003) and a growing interest on peer assessment effects on learning, increasingly frequently known as peer feedback (Sluijsmans, 2002; Topping, 2009; van Zundert, 2012).”
On the dynamics of students' approaches to learning: The effects of the teaching/learning environment (2006, methodology): “Peer / co - assessment Peer assessment has been used to differentiate between the individual contributions and small group projects ( Topping , 2003 ) .”
Scaffolding Self-Regulated Learning Through Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment: Guidelines for Classroom Implementation (2016, methodology): “These guidelines are based on a list of principles proposed by Topping (2003), but we removed recommendations referring to strictly summative approaches to PA and rephrased some recommendations in such a way that they apply to various types of PA.”