Mariya Y. Omelicheva
Department of Political Science, Purdue University
Self and Peer Evaluation in Undergraduate Education: Are Promises Worth
Risking the Perils?
This study canvasses reliability of students’ self and peer evaluation, a method of
assessment of university students that has recently gained renewed pedagogical interest
and broad recognition. Two experiments, imbedded in classroom curriculum, examined
the effects of the instrument of evaluation (with criteria vs. no criteria for evaluation
provided), the format of evaluation procedure (anonymous vs. non-anonymous), and
motivation of students (strong vs. weak) on the accuracy of students’ self and peer
ratings. The study also discusses important theoretical and pedagogical issues related to
the use of students’ self and peer assessment in university teaching and identifies the
ways of harnessing this evaluation technique constructively.
The quality of education in the American colleges and universities has been under
conscientious examination and stringent evaluation and critique coming from the sources
internal and external to educational establishments. Serious questions have been raised
about the aims and methods of teaching and learning and the contributions of the
universities to the larger society
1
. The arguments related to the conception of learning
focus on the importance of cultivating a propensity for life-long learning and developing
the skills of independent judgment and critical self-awareness in the students (Brown
1987).
To meet the lofty standards of high education, to improve the quality of learning,
and to empower the students to become effective life-learners, novel forms and methods
of instruction and assessment have been introduced in the colleges’ and universities’
curriculum. Peer assessment and evaluation, used in conjunction with collaborative
learning
2
or by itself, is a method of assessment of university students by their peers that
has recently gained renewed pedagogical interest and broad implementation. Traditional
assessment practices that preclude students’ participation in the processes of evaluation
thus perpetuating students’ intellectual dependency are inconsistent with the revisited
ideals and goals of the university education. Sharing with students the responsibility to
participate in the assessment of their own and peer students’ work is a strategy that
conforms to the conception of learning as active engagement and a dynamic ability to
organize and modify ideas (Boud 1990; Zariski 1996).
The recurring tendency of students to bias their self- and peer-evaluations
neutralizes the remarkable contributions of peer assessment to students’ learning. To
harness the peer assessment technique constructively, it is important to identify factors
that jeopardize and/or enhance the validity and reliability of peer assessment. I conduct
two experiments, in which I examine how the instrument of evaluation (with criteria vs.
1
An exciting exploration of the larger institutional context and alternative perspectives on the current
debates in higher education is presented in Pescosolido, Bernice A. and Ronald Aminzde (eds.). 1999. The
Social Worlds of Higher Education: Handbook for Teaching in A New Century. Pine Forge Press
2
See, for example, John D. Occhipinti. (2003). “Active and accountable: teaching comparative politics
using cooperative team learning.” Political Science and Politics 36 (January):69-75
Page 1 of 24 
Convention