Peer assessment of writing yields outcomes at least as good as teacher assessment and sometimes better¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · reviewr3·q2–q3
Currency · newest study 1998 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Peer assessment of writing appears capable of yielding outcomes at least as good as teacher assessment and sometimes better. → Keith Topping 1998
q3 i? First-year students given peer feedback showed greater gains in writing proficiency than comparison students (p = .009). → Keith Topping 1998 (2)
Evidence¶
Keith Topping 1998¶
Keith Topping. (1998). Peer Assessment Between Students in Colleges and Universities. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068003249
q2 · i? · review · r3
The review's summary of its writing-outcome section, covering descriptive and outcome studies of peer assessment of writing across many subjects and ESL contexts. It reports peer assessment "at least as good as teacher assessment and sometimes better".
"Peer assessment appears capable of yielding outcomes at least as good as teacher assessment and sometimes better. Formative feedback has been oral, written, and oral and written combined."
Keith Topping 1998 (2)¶
Keith Topping. (1998). Peer Assessment Between Students in Colleges and Universities. Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068003249
q3 · i? · review · r3
Outcome study by Richer (1992) comparing peer group discussion of essays with teacher discussion and feedback; grading of 174 pretest and posttest essays from 87 first-year students indicated "greater gains in writing proficiency in the peer feedback group (p = .009)".
"Grading of 174 pretest and posttest essays from 87 first-year students indicated greater gains in writing proficiency in the peer feedback group (p = .009)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Peer assessment of professional skills shows adequate reliability including in medicine, with outcomes generally at least equivalent to teacher assessment — related
- AI-assisted peer feedback enhanced lexical diversity only in the first writing task, with the group advantage disappearing by the second task — related
- Anonymous asynchronous online peer review of writing: lower-skill students sometimes felt inferior yet increased determination, while better writers felt they learned less — related
- Peer marks and grades show acceptably high reliability with teachers' marks in most comparison studies, but a substantial minority report low reliability — related
- Most studies used online peer feedback to improve students' task performance — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
peer-writing-assessment-as-good-as-teacher |
title |
Peer assessment of writing yields outcomes at least as good as teacher assessment and sometimes better |
description |
Peer assessment of writing yields outcomes at least as good as teacher assessment and sometimes better |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
1998 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-16 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — keith-topping-1998, keith-topping-1998-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.