Peer assessment in interdisciplinary learning: Measuring reliability and engaging critical thinking

IF 4.5 2区教育学 Q1 Social Sciences

Thinking Skills and Creativity Pub Date : 2025-08-08 DOI:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101950

François Berkmans , Maxence Bigerelle , Julie Lemesle , Ludovic Nys , Michal Wieczorowski , Christopher Brown

{"title":"Peer assessment in interdisciplinary learning: Measuring reliability and engaging critical thinking","authors":"François Berkmans , Maxence Bigerelle , Julie Lemesle , Ludovic Nys , Michal Wieczorowski , Christopher Brown","doi":"10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Peer assessment has gained recognition as a valuable pedagogical tool, yet its role in interdisciplinary learning remains underexplored. This study examines the reliability of peer assessment in an interdisciplinary oral evaluation setting, comparing student ratings with instructor evaluations over multiple sessions. A cohort of 41 students and 4 instructors assessed 15 presentations based on four criteria: communication, synthesis, illustration, and argumentation. Through ANOVA and regression analyses on 2409 grades, we observed a progressive alignment between student and instructor evaluations, with correlation coefficients improving from <em>R</em> = 0.55 (session 1) to <em>R</em> = 0.77 (session 3). Additionally, Cronbach’s alpha increased from 0.64 to 0.88, indicating increasing inter-rater reliability. Qualitative analysis of peer feedback revealed a shift from monodisciplinary to interdisciplinary reasoning, supporting the hypothesis that peer assessment fosters interdisciplinary understanding. A post-course survey confirmed this perception, with 85 % of students acknowledging an improved ability to assess interdisciplinary projects. These findings suggest that peer assessment is not only a valid evaluation method but also a learning process that fosters interdisciplinary competencies and engages students in critical thinking.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47729,"journal":{"name":"Thinking Skills and Creativity","volume":"58 ","pages":"Article 101950"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thinking Skills and Creativity","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187125001993","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Peer assessment has gained recognition as a valuable pedagogical tool, yet its role in interdisciplinary learning remains underexplored. This study examines the reliability of peer assessment in an interdisciplinary oral evaluation setting, comparing student ratings with instructor evaluations over multiple sessions. A cohort of 41 students and 4 instructors assessed 15 presentations based on four criteria: communication, synthesis, illustration, and argumentation. Through ANOVA and regression analyses on 2409 grades, we observed a progressive alignment between student and instructor evaluations, with correlation coefficients improving from R = 0.55 (session 1) to R = 0.77 (session 3). Additionally, Cronbach’s alpha increased from 0.64 to 0.88, indicating increasing inter-rater reliability. Qualitative analysis of peer feedback revealed a shift from monodisciplinary to interdisciplinary reasoning, supporting the hypothesis that peer assessment fosters interdisciplinary understanding. A post-course survey confirmed this perception, with 85 % of students acknowledging an improved ability to assess interdisciplinary projects. These findings suggest that peer assessment is not only a valid evaluation method but also a learning process that fosters interdisciplinary competencies and engages students in critical thinking.

查看原文本刊更多论文

跨学科学习中的同伴评估：测量可靠性和参与批判性思维

同伴评估作为一种有价值的教学工具已得到认可，但其在跨学科学习中的作用仍未得到充分探讨。本研究考察了跨学科口头评估设置中同伴评估的可靠性，比较了学生评分和教师在多个会话中的评估。由41名学生和4名教师组成的队列根据4个标准评估了15份报告：沟通、综合、说明和论证。通过对2409个年级的方差分析和回归分析，我们观察到学生和教师评价之间的逐步一致性，相关系数从R = 0.55（第1次）提高到R = 0.77（第3次）。此外，Cronbach 's alpha从0.64增加到0.88，表明评分者间信度增加。对同行反馈的定性分析揭示了从单学科到跨学科推理的转变，支持了同行评估促进跨学科理解的假设。一项课后调查证实了这一观点，85%的学生承认他们评估跨学科项目的能力有所提高。这些发现表明，同侪评估不仅是一种有效的评估方法，也是一个培养跨学科能力和培养学生批判性思维的学习过程。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Thinking Skills and Creativity EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

6.40

自引率

16.20%

发文量

172

审稿时长

76 days

期刊介绍： Thinking Skills and Creativity is a new journal providing a peer-reviewed forum for communication and debate for the community of researchers interested in teaching for thinking and creativity. Papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches and may relate to any age level in a diversity of settings: formal and informal, education and work-based.