Search results

This chapter shares ideas about how to encourage students to take responsibility for their individual learning and their role as a team member through the use of team contracts and peer evaluations. We also share how instructors can more easily determine individual grades for team projects. Team contracts can help instill a sense of responsibility, encourage accountability, and add structure by promoting the clarification of task-specific roles. In conjunction with team contracts, peer evaluations can reinforce the responsibilities assigned through the contract. Peer evaluations provide an opportunity for students to objectively and thoughtfully evaluate team member contributions to the collective result and reward individual participants more equitably related to the outcome obtained.

The chapter provides discussion and examples of student-developed team contracts and a sample peer evaluation form along with a discussion of how these documents have been used in the classroom. Using responses from a convenience survey of undergraduate and graduate students, we conclude by examining student feedback to suggest patterns of the perceptions of students toward the use of these tools.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a theoretical model that addresses how student citizenship behavior (CB) may be motivated by management of impression in a team-based project using peer evaluations.

This study applies impression management (IM) theory as the theoretical lens to explore the impact of IM tactics, in the forms of task-, self- and peer-focused tactics, on student CB in a team-based project using peer evaluations.

This paper posits that task-, self- and peer-focused IM tactics positively influence a student’s CB in a team-based project when peer evaluations are used. Furthermore, it is proposed that the relative weight of a peer evaluation strengthens the relationship between the three IM tactics and a student’s CB.

From a theoretical standpoint, this study extends IM–CB relationship from the employment setting to the academic setting. More importantly, this study offers crucial recommendations for instructors that may help improve the effectiveness of peer evaluations.

This research aims to investigate the differences in evaluations of job performance between male and female managers by those managers’ immediate bosses and peers.

Drawing on gender structure theory, along with ideas about status characteristics, the authors use hierarchical regression to test the hypotheses that male and female bosses and peers deferentially evaluate the male and female manager’s global job performance. The authors hypothesize significant two-way interactions (gender of the manager by gender of evaluator) in predicting a manager’s job performance.

The results suggest that while male peers rate female managers’ job performance significantly lower than that of male managers, female peers do not discriminate between genders in their performance evaluations. Also, managers’ bosses were found not to discriminate between genders of their subordinates.

The limitations of this study have to do primarily with the data. While the data are rich on some dimensions, they are weak on others, especially with regard to the detail about the jobs the respondents did, detailed level of familiarity with the evaluated managers, as well as racial background. The data also do not provide information on the different facets of job performance, the evaluation of which could potentially be impacted by managerial gender; this study is focused exclusively on global job performance.

The authors discuss various theoretical explanations of this pattern of results, as well as its possible influence on female managers’ careers. Although the effect size of the negative bias that male peers exhibit toward female managers is relatively small, it may be argued that lower performance assessments can accumulate over years in multiple job evaluations, negatively affecting the career of female leaders.

The evaluations supplied by different organizational members gain importance with the increased use of 360-degree feedback instruments not just for developmental but also for the job performance appraisal purposes. While the job evaluations of managers’ bosses have been investigated in the past with regard to the possible gender bias, this study provides the first known to the authors’, evidence. Also, this study points to a direct bias in performance assessments, rather than a potentially more subtle, non-performance-based bias that affects the disparities in wages and promotions of female managers. Thus, this study helps to fill a significant gap in the literature on organizations and it may have practical implications for the advancement of female managers. In addition to this contribution, this study also provides data that may be useful in resolving the ongoing debate whether female bosses act more as cogs in the machine or as change agents in organizations.

This paper investigates online evaluation processes on peer-to-peer platforms to highlight how online peer evaluation enacts neoliberal subjects and collectives.

The paper uses netnography (Kozinets, 2002) to study the online community of Airbnb. It is also based on 18 interviews, mostly with Airbnb users, and quantitative data about reviews.

Results indicate that peer-to-peer platforms constitute biopolitical infrastructures. They enact and consolidate narcissistic entrepreneurs of the self through evaluation processes and consolidating a for-show community. Specifically, three features make evaluation a powerful neoliberal agent. The object of evaluation shifts from the service to the user's own worth (1). The public nature of the evaluation (2) and symetrical accountability between the evaluator and the evaluatee (3) contribute to excessively positive reviews and this keeps the market fluid.

This paper calls for problematization of the idea of sharing in the so-called “sharing economy”. What is shared on peer-to-peer platforms is the comfort of engaging with people like ourselves.

This paper contributes to the literature on online accounting by extending consideration of evaluation beyond the review process. It also stresses that trust in the evaluative infrastructure is fostered by narcissistic relationships between users, who come to use the platform as a mirror. The peer-to-peer context refreshes the our knowledge on evaluation in a corporate context by highlighting phenomena of standardized spontaneity and euphemized evaluation language. This allows evaluation processes to incorporate a market logic without having to fuel competition.

This study aims to assess the effect of peer evaluations on team-level effort, productivity, motivation and overall team performance.

This study explores the impact of a peer evaluation system on 895 multicultural and transnational global virtual teams (GVTs) composed of 5,852 university students from 130 different countries. The study uses a quasi-experiment in which the group project is implemented under two conditions over two sequential iterations. In the first condition, team members do not receive peer evaluation feedback during the project. In the second condition, participants completed detailed peer evaluations of their team members and received feedback weekly for eight consecutive weeks.

Results suggest that when peer evaluations are used in GVTs during the project, teams show: higher levels of group effort; lower levels of average productivity and motivation; and no clear evidence of improved team performance. Results cast doubts on the benefits of peer evaluation within GVTs as the practice fails to reach its main objective of improving team performance and generates some negative internal dynamics.

The major implication of the study for managers and educators using GVTs is that the use of peer evaluations during the course of a project does not appear to improve objective team performance and reduces team motivation and perception of productivity despite increases in teams’ perceptions of effort and performance.

This study contributes to the scanty literature regarding the impact of peer evaluation systems on group-level dynamics and performance outcomes.

As global issues such as climate change, economic growth, social equality and the wealth gap are widely discussed, education for sustainable development (ESD) allows every human being to acquire the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values necessary to shape a sustainable future. It also requires participatory teaching and learning methods that motivate and empower learners to change their behavior and take action for sustainable development. Teachers have begun rating pupils based on peer assessment for open evaluation. Peer assessment enables students to transition from passive to active feedback recipients. The assessors improve critical thinking and encourage introspection, resulting in more significant recommendations. However, the quality of peer assessment is variable, resulting in reviewers not recognizing the remarks of other reviewers, therefore the benefits of peer assessment cannot be fulfilled. In the past, researchers frequently employed post-event questionnaires to examine the effects of peer assessment on learning effectiveness, which did not accurately reflect the quality of peer assessment in real time.

This study employs a multi-label model and develops a self-feedback system in order to use the AIOLPA system in the classroom to enhance students' learning efficacy and the validity of peer assessment.

The research findings indicate that the better peer assessment through the rapid feedback system, for the evaluator, encourages more self-reflection and attempts to provide more ideas, so bringing the peer rating closer to the instructor rating and assisting the evaluator. Improve self-evaluation and critical thinking for the evaluator, peers make suggestions and comments to help improve the work and support the growth of students' learning effectiveness, which can lead to more suggestions and an increase in the work’s quality.

ESD consequently promotes competencies like critical thinking, imagining future scenarios and making decisions in a collaborative way. This study builds an online peer assessment system with a self-feedback mechanism capable of classifying peer comments, comparing them with scores in a consistent manner and providing prompt feedback to critics.

This paper aims to describe an internal quality enhancement system based on peer reviewing and summarizes the first results of application at the Budapest University of Technology and Economics Faculty of Economic and Social Sciences.

A peer review framework has been developed to evaluate and further develop the teaching programs and practices. The questionnaire-based peer review program included 22 courses and involved almost 100 lecturers. Peer review outcomes are completed by end-of-semester student course evaluations.

The results allow us to map differences between lecturers and courses and to identify correlations between the assessment criteria applied for peer reviewing.

The implemented framework implies individual, faculty and organizational development to enhance a deeper understanding of how to create quality in teaching programs and processes. Secondly, the peer review program contributes to the establishment of a learning community with a growing common understanding of what is considered good quality in business education.

The paper is valuable as a guide to faculty management wishing to implement a peer review framework within their own institution. The novelty of the presented approach is that it focuses on a semester-long teaching performance including classroom performance, course outlines, teaching materials, course requirements and processes and means of student performance assessments.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the mechanism of how peer review helpfulness evaluation in online review communities is established, drawing upon the internalization and identification routes of persuasion effect.

Based on book reviews selected from Douban.com (a prestigious review community in China), this study used econometric models to investigate the effects of both reviews and reviewers’ characteristics on peer review helpfulness evaluation in review communities.

Review internalization is more persuasive than reviewers’ identification in peer evaluations, in terms of both short and long reviews. Reviews with extreme negative ratings tend to obtain higher level of helpfulness evaluation than those with positive or moderate ratings. The influence of reviewers’ characteristics is a significant cue in helping consumers to establish the trust perception in the context of short reviews, while its function diminishes in the context of long reviews, thus suggesting the importance of reviewers’ identification for short reviews in review communities.

The findings will enhance current understanding of peer review review helpfulness evaluation in online review communities and help practitioners administrate community reviews intelligently, help members write better reviews and customers in their product browsing experience.

First, this study enriches review evaluation research in review communities by demonstrating the importance of internalization and identification lens of persuasion effect when explaining review helpfulness; second, this study helps to confirm the existing findings that reviews with extreme negative ratings are more helpful than those with moderate or positive ratings in review communities; third, this study proposes a new perspective pertaining to the relationship between reviewers’ identification and helpfulness evaluation.

The urgency to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of public administrations has led to the adoption in the public sector – in Italy as well as in other countries – of tools and models inspired by the total quality management (TQM) approach, such as the common assessment framework (CAF). A parallel need was felt within public structures to train people, the “peers”, who aside from being able to implement the self‐evaluation activities of their own administration, also needed to be equipped with the necessary skills to complete external evaluation activities, namely “peer evaluations”, with the ultimate aim of spreading quality management culture and best practices in the field through an approach based on benchmarking. The purpose of this paper is to present the results of a survey designed to determine the training requirements that a “peer” should acquire in order to perform “evaluation” activities.

The paper has strong empirical connotations and is essentially based on, first, a questionnaire given to evaluators/self‐evaluators to identify the problems emerging with the application of the CAF model in administrations that have adopted it. In this sphere a great deal of attention has been paid to – in addition to the preparation of the questionnaire – the delicate task of codifying the answers to open questions proposed to interviewees; and second, the investigation inherent in the current educational choices in Italy in the TQM arena, specifically addressing the public sector.

Apart from the analysis of data obtained from the investigation, presented with descriptive statistics, the paper identifies the training content necessary: first, to place “peers” in a position to be able to autonomously and fully carry out their evaluation work on the basis of the CAF model; and second, to render the evaluation activities systematically comparable among the various administrations.

At the present time the research deals with the Italian context. However, future investigations involving different European countries could be carried out, taking the present results as a starting point for a benchmarking activity.

The paper puts forward the creation of a “network” of actors who manage all the “peer evaluation” activities, from the provision of the training pack and monitoring the “peer” exchange process, up to benchmarking initiatives and the dissemination of best practices.

The paper presents original data and information in order to identify the training needs of individuals that actually use CAF, starting from the assumption that the training of evaluators is the primary condition for promoting the adoption and diffusion of CAF in Italian public administrations and thus maximizing its benefits.