This is a description of use of a rating system in which both students (peers) and an instructor evaluated the performance of 32 debate teams and 136 peer team members, with peers' and the instructor's evaluations being equally weighted in assigning grades. Peer evaluation was psychometrically reliable. Peers and instructor were similar in evaluating defensive and offensive debate performance, but peers gave more favorable ratings than the instructor for presentation and research. Over-all, the rating system was perceived by participants as fair and not a popularity contest. Most peers reported that they were comfortable as evaluators.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmstrongM., & BoudD. (1983) Assessing participation in discussion: an exploration of the issues. Studies in Higher Education, 8, 33–44.
2.
CederblomD., & LounsburyJ. W. (1980) An investigation of user acceptance of peer evaluations. Personnel Psychology33, 567–579.
3.
DeNisiA. S.RandolphW. A., & BlencoeA. G. (1982) Level and source of feedback as determinants of feedback effectiveness. Proceedings of the Academy of Management 42nd Annual Meeting, New York, NY. Pp. 175–179.
4.
FedorD. B., & BettenhausenK. L. (1989) The impact of purpose, participant preconceptions, and rating level on the acceptance of peer evaluations. Group and Organization Studies, 14, 182–197.
5.
HaagaD. A. (1993) Peer review of term papers in graduate psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 20, 28–32.
6.
HartmanS.GriffethR.CrinoM., & HarrisO. J. (1991) Gender-based influences: the promotion recommendation. Sex Roles, 25, 285–300.
7.
HollanderE. P. (1956) The friendship factor in peer nominations. Personnel Psychology, 9, 435–447.
8.
HollanderE. (1965) Validity of peer nominations in predicting a distant performance criterion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 434–438.
9.
HollanderE. (1985) Leadership and power. In LindzeyG. & AronsonE (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology.Vol. 2. New York: Random House. Pp 485–537.
10.
KaneJ. S., & LawlerE. E. (1978) Methods of peer assessmentPsychological Bulletin, 85, 555–586.
11.
KlimoskiR. J., & LondonM. (1974) Role of the rater in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 445–451.
12.
LoveK. G. (1981) Comparison of peer assessment methods: reliability, validity, friendship bias, and user reaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 451–457.
13.
MelvinK. B. (1988) Rating class participation: the prof/peer method. Teaching of Psychology, 15, 137–139.
14.
Morahan-MartinJ. (1990) Use of debates in introductory psychology. In MakoskyV. P.SileoC. C.WhittemoreL. G.LandryC. P., & SkudeyM. L. (Eds.), Activities handbook for the teaching of psychology.Vol. 3. Washington, DC: American Psychological Assn. Pp. 214–218.
15.
SmithR. (1990) Are peer ratings of student debates valid?Teaching of Psychology, 17, 188–189.
16.
StevensJ. (1986) Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17.
WatersL. K., & WatersC. W. (1970) Peer nominations as predictors of short-term sales performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54, 42–44.
