Peer assessment of other students’ assignments

Peer assessment (PA) (sometimes known as peer feedback, peer evaluation, or peer review) refers to students providing feedback on other students’ assignments to help them improve their work. This feedback may or may not involve a grade. When properly implemented, PA can be a reliable and valid method of assessment.^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]}

There are a number of considerations when planning and implementing PA assignments. For example:

• Where will the PA activity take place (in class/out of class; online/offline)?

• To how many peers will students give feedback, and from how many will they receive feedback?

• What guidelines (questions, rubrics, checklists, rating scales) will you provide to students to help define their task?

• Will the feedback be anonymous?

• Will students provide feedback on the feedback they receive?

• Will students have the opportunity to revise and resubmit the assignment after receiving feedback from their peers? If they do, how much time will be allocated between the PA assignment and the subsequent assignment submission?

• Will the PA assignment be graded?

This article addresses these questions and more. We begin by considering why it might be worthwhile to have students engage in PA.

Back to top

Why have students engage in peer assessment?

Instructors might wonder if PA results in better learning. When learning is assessed via grades on assignments, there does not seem to be a consensus. Some studies showed gains^{[13][14][15][16]} and others did not.^[17] A different approach might be to consider whether PA results in developing students’ potential for better learning. Here, there is more agreement in the literature. Studies suggest that a number of characteristics of PA support students’ potential for better learning through student engagement.^[13][18] Furthermore, students’ sustained training and practice in the context of PA activities likewise supports students’ potential for better learning.^{[19][20][19][14][21][22][17]}

Back to top

Drafting your PA assignment

Drafting a PA assignment involves a number of logistical decisions, including deciding who will provide feedback to whom, how many students will provide feedback on a given student’s work, and whether or not such feedback will be anonymized. Some questions to consider are offered.

Where does the PA activity take place?

PA can be implemented in different settings:

The choice of setting may depend on desired learning outcomes, for example: students will be able to use a particular software program for giving peer feedback, or by giving face-to-face feedback, students will hone their interpersonal communication skills. In addition, practicalities to consider are class size and judicious use of in-class/out-of-class time.

To how many peers will students give feedback, and from how many will they receive feedback?

It is important to ensure that all students have the opportunity to both provide feedback on one another’s work and to receive feedback on their own work. Assigning students the task of providing feedback to 3-4 peers allows for sustained reflection and a variety of perspectives^[25][10][26] without the task becoming overwhelming.

When multiple peers are involved in providing feedback, consider:

• allocating assignments randomly, avoiding mutual pairs where possible^[27][12] to promote fair, candid feedback.^[2][28]

• forming small “feedback groups” at the beginning of term who peer assess one another’s work before revising it individually for submission.^[25] Feedback groups promote accountability for the feedback provided and allow opportunities to ask questions about the feedback received.

The following images illustrate various feedback directions. Detailed example descriptions appear in Examples of feedback directions.

		? = anonymous	? = anonymous
Example 1: Written report	Examples 2 & 4: Oral presentation/ Essay outline	Example 3: Newspaper article	Example 5: Written reflection on course readings	Example 6: Feedback on presentation visuals

What guidelines (guiding questions, rubrics, checklists and rating scales) would you provide to students to help clearly define their task?

The practice of developing and then sharing guiding questions, rubrics, checklists and rating scales with students helps PA assignments to be clear, effective and reliable, and can prevent misunderstandings about the feedback that students are supposed to provide.^[6][9] (For further explanations and examples, see Developing guiding questions, rubrics, checklists and rating scales to explicitly define the PA assignment.)

Is the feedback anonymous?

In the context of PA, anonymizing feedback means that you are aware of the identity of both the student being assessed and the students who are assessing, but the students are not aware of one another’s identity. Anonymizing is particularly appropriate when using PA to have students grade one another’s work or when you want students to focus on the feedback and not on who is providing it. You may choose to use a double blind review process similar to that used by academic journal reviewers:^[23] Each student submits an anonymized draft assignment. Each assignment is randomly distributed to multiple peer assessors who in turn submit an anonymized review that is subsequently provided to the author.

Not anonymizing the feedback encourages students to be accountable to each other for their feedback, thus providing opportunities to discuss their feedback with their peers.

Do students provide feedback on the feedback they receive (also known as “back evaluation”)?

Students can provide feedback on the usefulness of the feedback they have received.^[29][30] Providing such feedback helps students to think not only about how they would integrate feedback into their own work, but also how the feedback they provide may be interpreted by the student receiving it. This activity can ultimately improve the quality of peer feedback itself, as students practice their feedback skills, especially if you are planning several peer-assessed assignments^[2] in which students are able to incorporate the feedback received. Furthermore, if the student providing feedback knows that the student author will respond, the sense of accountability of the student providing feedback is increased.

You might choose to emphasize the importance of high-quality feedback by grading not only the assignment, but the quality of feedback received, as well.^{[29][6][8][12]} In such cases, it is particularly important to have guidelines for what constitutes high-quality feedback. These guidelines can be used by students to do a self-assessment of the quality of the feedback they have provided prior to submitting the PA assignment.

Do students have the opportunity to revise and resubmit the assignment after receiving feedback from their peers? If they do, how much time is allocated between the PA assignment and the subsequent assignment submission?

Feedback exclusively on a final assignment submission may be helpful for grading purposes, but it does not permit students to incorporate the feedback and improve that specific assignment. Allowing students enough time for providing feedback and revising their work based on the feedback received maximizes their learning and motivation, and may result in better quality assignments.^[31][32][10] Knowing that their feedback will be used by their peers to improve their work can encourage students to invest in the peer feedback assignment.^{[25][23][9][33]} It can be productive to have two rounds of peer feedback: mid-assignment and at the end of the assignment.^{[1][5][34][35][12]}

Are the PA assignments graded?

PA assignments can be graded in different ways:

• The instructor grades students’ feedback, either for quality or simply for completion.

• Peers grade each other’s work.

• A combination of instructor and peer grading is used.

• Peers submit a grade which the instructor can override.

In all cases, it is critical that students understand the criteria according to which grades will be allocated. If students are asked to provide feedback to peers, address whether they will be graded on the quality of the feedback they provide.

Note that technology-supported solutions to support the logistics of PA are available. For further information, request a consultation.

Back to top

Developing guiding questions, rubrics, checklists, and rating scales to explicitly define the PA assignment

Guiding questions

When PA is used to provide feedback for improvement, you are encouraged to develop questions that ask students to focus on elements of the assignment that the students can respond to as readers of the assignment. These questions may ask students to summarize the writing piece or identify (or paraphrase, list, or outline) specific elements of the assignment, rather than make judgments about the quality of the work.^[36][24] For example:

• What do you think is the thesis of the paper/speech? Paraphrase it below.

• What do you think is the strongest evidence for the writer’s/speaker’s position? Why?

• In each paragraph of the paper, underline the topic sentence.

In general, it is recommended that students respond to open-ended questions rather than closed-ended (yes/no) questions to elicit more thoughtful, useful feedback.^[24] For example:

• What do you think is the strongest evidence for the writer’s/speaker’s position? Why? instead of Did the writer provide evidence to support his/her claims?

Closed-ended questions may be appropriate in some cases, though, such as to ensure that all elements of an assignment are present.

Depending on the context, students may not be able to provide evaluative feedback. Evaluative feedback includes feedback that judges their peers’ critical or independent thinking, the quality of writing, or whether or not peers’ work is a unique contribution to the field. When students are not able to make such judgments, the reliability of the feedback is compromised.^[28] Asking students questions that call for evaluative responses may be appropriate where the questions are linked to course goals and students have had preparation in addressing such questions.

Rubrics

A rubric is an evaluation guide that specifies expectations for an assignment by listing the criteria by which the assignment will be assessed and describing the levels of quality for these criteria. Rubrics can guide students in assessing their peers’ work by making explicit the criteria according to which an assignment should be evaluated.

Rubrics have two basic components:

1. Evaluation criteria define the dimensions that are used to measure how well a student has carried out an assignment (e.g., “integrates course readings”; “develops main ideas”; “addresses counterarguments”). Criteria should be specific and concrete.

2. Standards of performance are qualitative descriptions of the characteristics of levels for judging students’ performance (e.g., excellent/competent/needs improvement).^[37]

The following example illustrates how criteria and standards can be displayed in rubric form. Additional criteria would follow the first two shown in the example.

Example: Research paper assignment rubric

Rubrics have several purposes. They can:

• Communicate your expectations to students. By providing a rubric to students in advance of the assignment due date, students can learn what you expect a successful assignment to look like and address these expectations when providing feedback to their peer(s).

• Encourage students to analyze their work (self-evaluation). Students can refer to the rubric’s evaluation criteria to analyze whether their assignment meets the stated expectations and then revise their assignment prior to receiving peer feedback.

• Make assessing peers’ work more efficient and consistent. When providing peer feedback, a student might simply circle or check off the appropriate categories on the rubric to provide feedback to the peer and then write a commentary elaborating on selected rubric categories. If PA is being used for grading purposes, rubrics can be particularly useful. Sharing a rubric can help to ensure that all assessors have a common understanding of the expectations for an assignment, thereby increasing consistency among assessors.^[37]

Rubrics do not need to be complicated. You might focus on three to six key criteria when developing a rubric.^[36][26]

If using PA for grading purposes, make sure that it is clear how responses to a rubric translate into grades. For example, if certain rubric categories count for a greater percentage than others, make this clear in the rubric itself.

Checklists and rating scales

If you wish to provide clear expectations for students in a simpler form than a rubric, you may choose to develop a checklist or a rating scale that describes the key criteria of a successful assignment. Checklists are usually designed in yes/no formats that speak to student performance according to specified criteria. Rating scales state the criteria and provide a range of selections to describe the quality of student work.

Example: Research paper assignment checklist

Example: Research paper assignment rating scale

See examples of PA guiding questions, rubrics, checklists and rating scales.

Back to top

Obtaining buy-in from students and guiding them

Students who are unclear about your rationale for implementing PA are less likely to have confidence or actively participate in PA assignments.^[38] Thus, key first steps in implementing PA are to explain why you are using PA as a learning strategy, what aspects of the work students are expected to assess, and how. Students may have concerns about PA assignments, such as perceived expertise of peers, the time involved, and potential bias.^[6] To address students’ concerns, you might consider how the implementation of PA can be designed such that it is inclusive.^[39] It is also important to respond to any questions and concerns that students have. TAs should be part of such conversations.^[2] You might consider the following actions for obtaining buy-in:

• Raise awareness of PA from the very first day of class using various means, such as in-class discussions, and by providing information in the course outline and in myCourses.^[2][5][10] Giving and receiving feedback can be linked to the course learning outcomes.^[5][12] For example, learning outcomes might include one of the following: “Students will give and receive constructive feedback on their work,” “Students will learn to integrate peer feedback to improve their written work,” or “Students will gain experience with peer review in their discipline.”

• Outline the PA assignment carefully.^[2] Students should have the chance to ask clarifying questions before embarking on PA.

• Facilitate group discussions about what types of feedback are helpful and constructive, and how to share feedback.^[11] For example, encourage students to begin by addressing positive characteristics of the assignment they are assessing^[26] or to “sandwich” constructive criticism between descriptions of two of the assignment’s strengths. You might also teach students the TAG acronym for commenting on peers’ work:

  o   Tell something good.

  o   Ask a question.

  o   Give a concrete suggestion.

• Share your own experiences with PA (often referred to as “peer review” among scholars), framing it as an important step towards contributing to a disciplinary community and internalizing expectations for academic writing.^{[31][36][40][10]}

• Have students complete the PA assignment aloud in pairs the first time to provide the opportunity to talk through their rationales with one another.^[26]

Involve students in developing and clarifying assessment criteria

Involving students can help prepare them to engage in the PA assignment as they develop ownership of the assessment criteria.^[3][4] Depending upon the class size and dynamics, you may choose to have pre-developed criteria that are open for negotiation,^[8] or to co-create criteria, or even to have small groups of students identify criteria, and then have the whole class come to a consensus on a manageable number of criteria for the final rubric.^[8] Regardless of the method of involving students that you ultimately choose, ensure that students understand how to use the rubric once it has been finalized.^[41]

Provide training and practice

A variety of ways exist to support students with providing and receiving feedback on one another’s work:

• Clarify expectations and ensure students understand all terms used in the PA assignment. For example, what does it mean for a paper to be “well-organized?”.^[26]

• Discuss what you mean by constructive feedback, explaining that feedback can guide peers in improving their work in concrete ways.^[23]

• Provide students with examples of poorly-written sample comments and have students rewrite them as constructive feedback.

• Model PA for students with sample assignments^[31][26] and facilitate in-class discussions of what constitutes constructive feedback.^[31][23][9]

• Describe to students the different ways they might read an assignment, thereby drawing their attention to the fact that they may focus on different elements. For example, you might encourage students to read each assignment several times—once for meeting minimum assignment requirements (e.g., format), once for content critique, and once for style/structure critique— followed by a final overall assessment.^[23]

• Encourage students to concentrate on the content/organization as much as possible and avoid focusing on features such as typographical errors and grammar problems.^[26]

• Offer students the opportunity to practice PA with sample assignments^[8] before they begin assessing one another’s work. Provide examples of assignments that meet the criteria along with corresponding rubrics or lists of questions.^[6][9] Examples can illustrate good, average, and poor assignments from a previous term (with student consent). Give students a chance to offer constructive feedback on these assignments as a group; then, debrief the experience and discuss the feedback they provided together during class.^[2] In-class polling with a sample rubric may be used to evaluate a sample assignment, to allow you to see if students’ expectations are aligned with your expectations, and then to discuss why/why not.

• Hold class discussions, brainstorming sessions or mini-lectures to help students understand how to decide which feedback to act on in situations with conflicting comments from multiple peer assessors.^[23]

Back to top

Monitoring the PA assignment

Monitoring the PA assignment can involve checking the feedback students provide to one another; it can also involve evaluating the PA assignment itself.

Monitoring student feedback

In addition to supporting students with developing confidence and competence in assessing peers’ work, it is important to monitor student-to-student communication throughout the PA assignment.^[9] For electronically-submitted feedback, you should periodically view and assess a selection of the comments provided^[42] so as to ensure that comments are constructive and appropriate. For in-class feedback, you might keep an attentive ear to students’ conversations and discretely intervene among pairs or small groups if needed.

Evaluating the PA assignment

Inviting student feedback on the PA experience can inform future iterations of such assignments. It is therefore worthwhile to learn what students thought worked well and what they thought could be improved.

An evaluation can be as simple as a short survey with space for comments that students complete at the end of a PA activity. You can also include questions about PA on mid-course and end-of-course evaluations.

Another means for gaining insight into the value of a PA assignment is to require students to submit the feedback they received along with their revised assignments.^[33] While students providing feedback may be asked to justify each element of their assessment^[29] with reference to specific passages in the assignment, students who received feedback may be asked to explain what changes they made further to the feedback and why.^[26]

You may choose to share the feedback you have received about the PA assignment with the students. Hearing what other students thought worked well can make students more receptive to PA. Furthermore, explaining to students what changes were/will be made to future PA assignments as a result of students’ feedback signals to them that the evaluation is taken seriously. You may find that it is useful to modify the PA assignment for subsequent iterations further to the feedback that you receive.

The questions and prompts below have been gleaned and adapted from research on PA, and are shared here to provide inspiration for you as you think about what you would like to learn from your students regarding their PA experience.

1. Likert scale rankings^[43]

   1. The peer assessment assignment …

      1. was fair

      2. was informative

      3. aided my learning

      4. was accurate

      5. was unbiased

      6. was easy

      7. was good

      8. was useful^[44]

      9. made me evaluate my own work more critically

      10. facilitated my learning^[2]

      11. was a valuable experience^[2]

   2. Peer assessment assignments …

      1. make me more independent

      2. make me think

      3. make me learn more

      4. make me gain confidence

   3. My final grade was a fair reflection of my effort^[2]

   4. I learned from my peers’ comments^[2]

   5. I think that…

      1. my peers did a good job in providing me with critical feedback on my work^[45]

      2. I improved my written work as a result of the reviews that I received or wrote^[45]

2. Plus/Delta evaluations^[46]

   1. What is one thing you appreciate about the peer assessment assignment?

   2. What is one thing that you would change about the peer assessment assignment?

3. Feedback ratings^[47]

   1. Using a scale where 1 = “only positive feedback” and 10 = “no holds barred review” (that is, direct feedback that, while constructive, may be positive or negative), rate the kind of feedback you:

   2. would like to receive

   3. normally receive

   4. normally give

4. Multiple-choice questions^[45]

   1. As a learning tool, peer assessment was: very useful/somewhat useful/no opinion/not very useful/useless

   2. I learnt most from: writing reviews of other students’ work/receiving reviews of my own work/writing and receiving reviews/not sure

5. Open-ended questions:

   1. How would you describe the quality of the feedback that you received from your peer(s)?^[44]

   2. How would you describe the quality of the feedback that you provided to your peer(s)?^[44]

   3. Based on your experience, how would you feel about engaging in a peer assessment exercise in the future?^[44]

   4. How do you feel about reviewing another student’s work?^[44]

   5. How do you feel about another student reviewing your work?^[44]

   6. What aspect of the peer assessment contributed most to your learning?^[44]

   7. To what extent were you prepared for the peer assessment exercise?^[44]

   8. What did you like most about peer assessment?^[2]

   9. What did you like least about peer assessment?^[2]

   10. What changes would you like to see in the peer assessment exercise?^[2]

Back to top

References

^[1]Baker, D. F. (2008). Peer assessment in small groups: A comparison of methods. Journal of Management Education, 32(2), 183–209.

^[2]Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., & Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427–441.

^[3]Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331–350.

^[4]Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287–322.

^[5]Fellenz, M. R. (2006). Toward fairness in assessing student groupwork: A protocol for peer evaluation of individual contributions. Journal of Management Education, 30(4), 570–591.

^[6]Liu, N.-F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279–290.

^[7]Lu, R., & Bol, L. (2007). A comparison of anonymous versus identifiable e-peer review on college student writing performance and the extent of critical feedback. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(2), 100–115.

^[8]Searby, M., & Ewers, T. (1997). An evaluation of the use of peer assessment in higher education: A case study in the School of Music, Kingston University. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 371–383.

^[9]Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276.

^[10]van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Design principles and outcomes of peer assessment in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 341–356.

^[11]Wanchid, R. (2015). Different sequences of feedback types: Effectiveness, attitudes, and preferences. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 50, 31–64.

^[12]Xiao, Y., & 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.

^[13]Dickson, H., Harvey, J., & Blackwood, N. (2019). Feedback, feedforward: Evaluating the effectiveness of an oral peer review exercise amongst postgraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(5), 692-704.

^[14]Huisman, B., Saab, N., Van Driel, J., & Van Den Broek, P. (2018). Peer feedback on academic writing: Undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(6), 955-968.

^[15]Mulder, R., Baik, C., Naylor, R., & Pearce, J. (2014). How does student peer review influence perceptions, engagement and academic outcomes? A case study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(6), 657–677.

^[16]Ramon-Casas, M., Nuño, N., Pons, F., & Cunillera, T. (2018). The different impact of a structured peer-assessment task in relation to university undergraduates’ initial writing skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(5); 653-663.

^[17]Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2018). Formative self-and peer assessment for improved student learning: the crucial factors of design, teacher participation and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1032-1047.

^[18]Ion, G., Sánchez Martí, A., & Agud Morell, I. (2019). Giving or receiving feedback: Which is more beneficial to students’ learning? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(1), 124-138.

^[19]Ashenafi, M. M. (2017). Peer-assessment in higher education - twenty-first century practices, challenges and the way forward. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(2), 226-251.

^[20]Dyevre, A., & Wijtvliet, W. (2019). Can peer assessment be used to improve students’ writing skills? Evidence from a randomized controlled trial. SSRN.

^[21]Reddy, K., Harland, T., Wass, R., & Wald, N. (2020). Student peer review as a process of knowledge creation through dialogue. Higher Education Research & Development, 1-13.

^[22]van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 270-279.

^[23]Rubin, R. S. (2006). The academic journal review process as a framework for student developmental peer feedback. Journal of Management Education, 30(2), 378–398.

^[24]Nilson, L. B. (2003). Improving student peer feedback. College Teaching, 51(1), 34–38.

^[25]Leialoha, D., Leialoha, S., & Leialoha-Waipa, S. (2012). Critical friends: A novel approach to improving peer and instructor feedback. Faculty Focus.

^[26]Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) Clearinghouse. (2006). Creating effective peer review groups to improve student writing. Retrieved January 14, 2025 from https://wac.colostate.edu/teaching/tipsheets/peerreviewSB.pdf

^[27]Bostock, S. (n.d.). Student peer assessment. The Higher Education Academy.

^[28]Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Pihlajamäki, H., & Kotkas, T. (2006). Self-, peer- and teacher-assessment of student essays. Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(1), 51–62.

^[29]Bloxham, S., & West, A. (2004). Understanding the rules of the game: Marking peer assessment as a medium for developing students’ conceptions of assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(6), 721–733.

^[30]Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education & Training International, 37(4), 346–355.

^[31]Falchikov, N. (2007). The place of peers in learning and assessment. In D. Boud & N. Falchikov (Eds.) Rethinking assessment in higher education: Learning for the longer term (pp. 212-242). Routledge.

^[32]Friedman, B. A., Cox, P. L., & Maher, L. E. (2008). An expectancy theory motivation approach to peer assessment. Journal of Management Education, 32(5), 580–612.

^[33]Weimer, M. (2010). Alternative grading methods for the college classroom. Faculty Focus.

^[34]Murrell, K. L. (1984). Peer performance evaluation: When peers do it they do it better. Journal of Management Education, 9(4), 83–85.

^[35]Weimer, M. (2015). Peer assessment that improves performance in groups. Faculty Focus.

^[36]Kokernak, J., & Pei, L. (n.d.). 11 ways to teach peer writing and response, in any course and any size class. Reprinted on the Louisiana State University website and retrieved January 14, 2025 from https://www.lsu.edu/hss/english/university_writing/faculty_resources/teaching_strategies/peer_response_strategies.php

^[37]Stevens, D., & Levi, A. (2005). Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback, and promote student learning. Stylus Publishing.

^[38]Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1997). Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 233–239.

^[39]Tissenbaum, S. (2019). Peer assessment in higher education: A viable inclusive practice. Teaching for Learning @ McGill.

^[40]Simon, C. (2006). Developing employability skills: Peer assessment in higher education. Education + Training, 48(7), 508-517.

^[41]Andrade, H. G. (2005). Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53(1), 27–30.

^[42]Orlando, J. (2011). Using peer review to improve student writing. Faculty Focus.

^[43]Egodawatte, G. (2010). A rubric to self-assess and peer-assess mathematical problem solving tasks of college students. Acta Didactica Napocensia 3(1), 75-88.

^[44]Moore, C., & Teather, S. (2013). Engaging students in peer review: Feedback as learning. Issues in Educational Research, 23(2), 196-211.

^[45]Pearce, J., Mulder, R., & Baik, C. (2009). Involving students in peer review: Case studies and practical strategies for university teaching. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne.

^[46]Codone, S. (2011). Getting immediate student feedback the plus/delta way. Faculty Focus.

^[47]Moore, C. (2016). Frame your feedback: Making peer review work in class. Faculty Focus.

McLennan Library Building 3415 McTavish Street Suite MS-12(ground level), Montreal, Quebec H3A 0C8 | Tel.: 514-398-6648 | Fax: 514-398-8465 | Email: tls@mcgill.ca