A supervised method for unbiased peer-to-peer evaluation. An experience with engineering students

Francisco J. Simois


Continuous evaluation is an assessment method which has some appealing advantages but also implies an increase of the teacher’s efforts and it may be unfeasible if the class is large.

Of course, new technologies may be used to implement automatized evaluations, but it is usually quite difficult to carry them out when a complex task like an engineering problem is to be judged.

An interesting alternative is a peer-to-peer evaluation, that is, the students themselves review their works. Nevertheless, one drawback is that it is likely that the grades are overrated. Although this is a well-known problem, not much effort is usually put into solving it. In this work we propose a novel method to limit this inconvenience, which is that the teacher randomly supervises a fraction of the students tasks.

In this paper we present the results of such an experience carried out in a Signal Processing course within a Robotics Engineering degree. More precisely, four different sets of problems were solved by the teacher in class. At the same time, they were peer-to-peer reviewed by the students, following the indications given by the professor. Later, when the random supervision is performed, a penalty is applied if a major flaw in a student’s evaluation is detected. Thanks to this strategy, the scores tended to be more and more accurate according to the teacher’s criteria.

Finally, the results of a survey anonymously fulfilled by the students to assess this experience are also presented.


Peer-to-peer evaluation; Supervised assessment; Engineering course; Higher education

Full Text:



Allal, L. (1991). Vers une pratique de l’évaluation formative. Brussels: De Boek.

Arias Macías C.M., Arriazu Navarro R., Casanova Arias J.L., Fernández Arias J., Cárdenas Rebollo J.M. and Rey-Stolle M.F. (2014). Use of Blackboard Collaborate platform as a higher education teaching aid. International Journal on Advances in Education Research, 1(2), 109-124.

Biggs, J. (2006). Calidad del aprendizaje universitario. [Quality of university learning.] Madrid: Narcea.

Birembaum, M., Breuer, K., Cascallar, E., Dochy, F., Dori, Y., Ridway, J., Wiesemes, R. and Nickmans, G. (2006). A Learning Integrated Assessment System. Educational Re- search Review, 1(1), 61-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2006.01.001

Bologna (1999). Joint declaration of the Ministers responsible for higher education convened in Bologna on the 19th of June. Available at http://www.magna-charta.org/resources/files/BOLOGNA_DECLARATION.pdf.

Broadfoot, P. and Black, P. (2004). Redefining assessment? The first ten years of “Assessment in Education”. Assessment in Education, 11(1), 7-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969594042000208976

Coll, C. and Onrubia, J. (1999). Evaluación de los aprendizajes y atención a la diversidad. In C. Coll (Coord.), Psicología de la instrucción. La enseñanza y el aprendizaje en la educación secundaria, (pp. 141-168). Barcelona: Horsori / ICE de la UB.

Coll C., Rochera M.J., Mayordomo R.M., Naranjo M. (2007). Continuous assessment and support for learning: an experience in educational innovation with ICT support in higher education. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 5(3), 783-804.

De Grez, L., Valcke, M. and Roozen, I. (2012). How Effective Are Self- and Peer Assessment of Oral Presentation Skills Compared with Teachers' Assessments? Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(2), 129-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1469787412441284

Delgado, A. M., Borge, R., García, J. Oliver, R. and Salomón, L. (2005). Competencias y diseño de la evaluación continua y final en el Espacio Europeo de Educación Superior. Programa de Estudios y Análisis (EA2005-0054). Madrid: Ministerio de educación y Ciencia. Dirección General de Universidades.

Díaz Barriga, F. (2006). La evaluación auténtica centrada en el desempeño: una alternativa para evaluar el aprendizaje y la enseñanza. In F. Díaz Barriga (Coord.). Enseñanza situada: vínculo entre la escuela y la vida (pp. 125-163). México: McGraw-Hill.

EHEA (2010). European Higher Education Area. Available from: http://www.ehea.info/.

Falchikov, N. and Goldfinch, J. Student Peer Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis Comparing Peer and Teacher Marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543070003287

Harris, J. (2011). Peer assessment in large undergraduate classes: an evaluation of a procedure for marking laboratory reports and a review of related practices. Advances in Physiology Education, 35(2), 178-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.00115.2010

Koç, C. (2011). The Views of Prospective Class Teachers about Peer Assessment in Teaching Practice. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(4), 1979-1989.

Kommalage, M. and Gunawardena, S. (2011). Advances in Physiology Education, 35(1), 48-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.00091.2010

Lansiquot, R. and Rosalia C. (2015). Online Peer Review: Encouraging Student Response and Development. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 26(1), 105-123.

Marks, L. and Jackson, M. (2013). Student Experience of Peer Assessment on an MSc Programme. Bioscience Education, 21(1), 20-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.11120/beej.2013.00015

Mateo Andrés, J. and Martínez Olmo, Francesc (2005). La evaluación alternativa de los aprendizajes. Cuadernos de Docencia Universitaria, nº 3, ICE-Universidad de Barcelona.

McDonald, R. (2006). The use of evaluation to improve practice in learning and teaching. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), 3-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703290500472087

Nunziati, G. (1990). Pour construire un dispositif d’évaluation d’aprentissage. Cahiers Pédagogiques, 280, 47-64.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3

Schunk, D.M. and Zimmerman, B. J. (eds.) (1998). Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice. New York: The Guilford Press.

Schlichting, K. and Fox, K. (2015). An Authentic Assessment at the Graduate Level: A Reflective Capstone Experience. Teaching Education, 26(3), 310-324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2014.996748

Torrano, F. and González, M. C. (2004). Self-Regulated Learning: Current and Future Directions. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 2(1), 1-34.

William, D. (2000). Integrating summative and formative functions of assessment. Keynote address. First Annual Conference of the European Association for Educational Assessment. Prague, Czech Republic.

Xiao, Y. and Lucking, R. (2008). The impact of two types of peer assessment on students' performance and satisfaction within a Wiki environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3-4), 186-193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2008.06.005

Abstract Views

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

This journal is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NonDerivs 4.0 Internacional License.

Universitat Politècnica de València

e-ISSN: 2341-2593   https://dx.doi.org/10.4995/muse