Alignment, rewards, and setting do not discriminate between peer assessment design classes, because a single practice typically dominates each¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i0 Three design elements were not statistically significant at the 0.05 level and had very small effect sizes: alignment (p = 1.000; R² = 0.003), rewards (p = 0.130; R² = 0.007), and setting (p = 0.210; R² = 0.027). → Alqassab 2023

Evidence¶

Alqassab 2023¶

Alqassab, M., Strijbos, J.-W., Panadero, E., Fernández Ruiz, J., Warrens, M., & To, J. (2023). A Systematic Review of Peer Assessment Design Elements. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09723-7

q2 · i0 · review · r2

Null result from the LCA of 891 cases: these elements showed no evidence of discriminating between the five classes. The review explains that in the sample typically a single practice was used (e.g., setting = formal, alignment to curriculum = yes).

"The three peer assessment design elements that were not statistically significant at the 0.05 level and had very small effect sizes are alignment ( p = 1.000; R2 = 0.003), rewards (p = 0.130; R2 = 0.007), and se tting ( p = 0.210; R2 = 0.027)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In school studies, cooperative and peer-learning methods that reward groups on every member's individual learning raised achievement more than methods without such rewards — related
• Student choice is rare in authentic assessment designs while assigned, sometimes graded, self-reflection is more common — related