Evaluating Student Papers: The Case for Peer Review

Abstract

Abstract One approach for grading papers in large business classes is to require students to evaluate each other's work. Both students and instructors can gain much in such peer review processes, but can students be trusted to grade each other's papers? This article describes an experiment in which term projects, a preprinted evaluation form, and generalizability theory were used to judge the reliability of student grading. The results suggest that students can be both consistent and fair in their assessments. These findings, along with mostly favorable student reactions and the fact that employee valuation is an important management skill, create a strong case for peer review when evaluating student papers.