Yuliana Lavrysh


In order to develop the skills and competences required in a professional environment, university students have to reflect on their own role in the learning process. The traditional methods of assessment do not assess reflective thinking, critical thinking, self-evaluation and peer evaluation. The following paper outlines and evaluates the implementation of peer and self-assessment techniques in higher education, in ESP course at National Technical University of Ukraine “Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute” as a case study. The rationale of the alternative type assessment systems is examined, and the efficiency of these methods is evaluated and compared by the use of attitudinal questionnaires completed by the participating students and the lecturer’s assessments and feedback. The methodology to investigate the effect of peer and self-assessment as a part of the learning process includes literature observation, case study, developing marking criteria, examples of peer and self- assessment strategies and activities in ESP course. Forty quantitative peer and self-assessment studies were subjected to analysis. The study pointed to differences between self and peer assessments. Peer assessment was found to resemble more closely teacher assessments whereas self-assessment demonstrated difference with teacher’s marks. One of the most essential conditions for objective and relevant performance of the evaluation was found as well-understood assessment criteria. Hypotheses concerning the greater validity of peer and self- assessments were not supported. We have drawn the conclusions that the application of peer and self- assessment methods improves students’ critical thinking skills, involves students into learning and assessment processes, keeps motivation up to study and provides them with a greater ownership of the whole learning and assessment process. Therefore peer and self-assessment techniques could be effectively implemented in the course of ESP at universities. 


peer assessment; self-assessment; ESP course; assessment criteria; summative assessment; formative assessment; critical judgment.

Full Text:



Aeginitou, V., Νteliou, E., & Vlahoyann N., (2010) Reflections in the mirror: Τhe contribution of self and peer assessment in the teaching of speaking skills. Advances in Research on Language Acquisition : Selected Paper, 149-163. Retrieved from:

Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (2005). Peer assessment of language proficiency. Language Testing, 22(3), 93-121.

Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Wilson, R. W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 891-901.

Dickinson, L. & Wenden, A. (Eds.). (1995). Autonomy, self-direction and self-access in language teaching and learning. Special issue of System, 23/2.

Falchikov, N. & Boud, D. (2007) ‘Assessment and emotion: The impact of being assessed’ in D. Boud & N. Falchikov (eds) Rethinking Assessment for Higher Education: Learning for the Longer Term (Abingdon: Routledge), pp. 144–156.

Grez, De L., Valcke M., & Roozen, I. (2012). How effective are self- and peer assessment of oral presentation skills compared with teachers’ assessments? Active Learning in Higher Education, 13, 129-142.

Iraji, H.R., Enayat, M.J, Momeni, M. (2016). The Effects of Self- and Peer-assessment on Iranian EFL Learners' Argumentative Writing. Practice in Language Studies, 6 (4), 716-722.

Kaufman, J. H. & Schunn, C. D. (2010). Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39(3), 387-406.

Kirby, N.F. & Downs, C.T. (2007). Self-assessment and the disadvantaged student; Potential for encouraging self-regulated learning? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(4), 475- 494.

Magin, D. & Helmore, P. (2001) Peer and teacher assessments of oral presentations: how reliable are they? Studies in Higher Education 26: 287-298.

Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, Peer-, and Teacher- assessments in Japanese University EFL Writing Classrooms. Language Testing, 29(1), 75-100.

Miraglia, E. (1995). A self-diagnostic assessment in the basic writing course . Journal of Basic Writing, 14(2), 48-67. Retrieved from:

Patri, M (2002) The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer assessment of oral skills. Language Testing 19(2): 109–31.

Rignall, M. (1997). English for Academic Studies Series: Speaking. (Eds.). Prentice Hall Europe, London.

Ross, John A. (2006). The Reliability, Validity, and Utility of Self-Assessment. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 11(10). Retrieved from:

Sadler, P. M. & Good, P. (2006). The impact of self-and peer-grading on student learning. Educational assessment, 11(1), 1-31.

Stognieva, O. (2015). Implementing peer assessment in a Russian university ESP classroom. Journal of Language and Education, 4(1), 63-73.

Taras, M. (2001). The use of tutor feedback and student self-assessment in summative assessment tasks: towards transparency for students and for tutors. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(6), 605-614.

Topping, K. (2003). Self- and peer assessment in school and university: reliability, validity and utility, in M. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cacallar (Eds). Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards, pp.55-87.

Toulmin, S.E. (2006). Reasoning in theory and practice. In D. Hitchcock and B. Verheij (Eds.), Arguing on the Toulmin model: New essays in argument analysis and evaluation (pp. 25-29).

Vickerman, P. (2009). Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: an attempt to deepen learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), 221-230.

Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & Merrienboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20, 270-279.

GOST Style Citations



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2016 Yuliana Lavrysh

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

ISSN 2410-8286 (Online), ISSN 2409-3351 (Print)