Where it is used
Each entry identifies the volume, edition, chapter or appendix in which the work appears.
The evidence behind the series
Follow the research.
Explore every source.
Browse the scientific research and professional literature used across all seven volumes of The Science of Learning for Educators.
7book volumes
8author ranges
1searchable library
Search the collection
Find a paper, author or idea.
Choose an author range, search a title or concept, or narrow the collection by source type. Open any result to see where it appears in the books, read its evidence summary and follow available source links.
1 reference
-
- Vol 5 RE: Chapters 6, 9, 11, 14
- Vol 5 TE: App C
peer assessmentassessment criteriaformative feedbackpeer judgmentassessment reliabilitywriting assessmentfeedback literacyassessment safeguardsJournal article Evidence summaryAt a glance
Topping defines peer assessment as arrangements in which learners consider and specify the level, value, or quality of products or performances by equal-status peers. The review proposes a detailed typology showing that designs differ by subject, objectives, output, participant level, matching, directionality, anonymity, assessment format, and whether feedback or grades are involved.
Key ideas
Reviewing higher-education studies, it finds peer marks can reach adequate reliability and validity across many settings, although agreement depends on training, criteria, task, and aggregation. Evidence was strongest for positive formative effects in writing and in uses involving marks, grades, or tests; evidence for presentations, group projects, and professional skills was then more limited. Potential learning mechanisms include clarifying standards, comparing approaches, articulating judgement, receiving more feedback, and developing responsibility. Risks include friendship bias, collusion, status effects, anxiety, superficial comments, and use of peer scores for high-stakes decisions without sufficient safeguards.
Why it matters
Effective implementation requires explicit criteria, modelling and practice, constructive feedback, transparency about purpose, monitoring, and opportunities to act on feedback. The article frames peer assessment as a learning process, not simply inexpensive substitute marking.
View or buy the cited work >>Read a similar article free online >>
A transparent research trail
More than a bibliography.
What it contributes
Evidence summaries explain the central idea and why the source matters to educators.
How to access it
Entries link to lawful full text where available, or to a publisher, library or purchase page.
Edition abbreviations
- TE
- Teacher Edition
- PE
- Practice Edition
- RE
- Research Edition
Citation checks
References are checked against publisher records, scholarly indexes, DOI or ISBN metadata, repositories and author records where available. An entry marked [Citation not verified] preserves the wording found in the relevant volume without attributing findings to an unconfirmed work.
From sources to a coherent pathway