References on Calibrated Peer Review™

Initial Publication Date: September 20, 2008
CPR Publications
  • Balfour, S. "Teaching Writing and Assessment Skills: The Intrinsic and Conditional Pedagogy of Calibrated Peer Review Assessment Handbook (submitted) Contact for pre-print.
  • Berry, F.C.; Carlson, P.A.; Millard, D.L., 2006. "Calibrated Peer Review™ for ABET Assessment." Proceedings of the National STEM Assessment Conference, Washington DC. pp. 190-193.
  • Carlson, P.A.; Berry, F. C."Calibrated Peer Review and Assessing Learning Outcomes," 33rdASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Session F3E, pp F3E 1- F3E6, (2003), [Accessed September 20, 2008]
  • Furman, B.; Robinson, W., 2003. "Improving Engineering Report Writing with Calibrated Peer Review™" Proceedings of the 33rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Boulder CO.
  • Gerdeman, R.D., A.A. Russell, K.J. Worden (2007). Web-Based Student Writing and Reviewing in a Large Biology Lecture Course Journal of College Science Teaching 36: 46-53.
  • Hartberg,Y., A.B. Guernsel, N.J. Simpson, and V. Balaster, 2008. Development of Student Writing in Biochemistry Using Calibrated Peer Review™. Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, February 2008, pp. 29-44. [Accessed September 25, 2008]
  • Keeney-Kennicutt, W.; Guernsel, A.B.; Simpson, N., 2008. "Overcoming Student Resistance to a Teaching Innovation." Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, January 2008, pp. 1 - 26.
  • McCarty, T, Parkes, M.V., Anderson, T.T., Mines, J, Skipper, B.J., Grebosky, J., 2005. "Improved Patient Notes from Medical Students during Web-Based Teaching Using Faculty-Calibrated Peer Review™ and Self-Assessment." Academic Medicine, v. 80, n. 10 (October Supplement), pp. 567-570.
  • Pelaez, N., 2002. Problem-based writing with peer review improves academic performance in physiology. Advances in Physiology Education 26: 174-184.
  • Plutsky, S.; Wilson, B. A., 2004. "Comparison of Three Methods for Teaching and Evaluating Writing: A Quasi-experimental Study," Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, v. 46, pp. 50-61.
  • Prichard, J. R., 2005. "Writing to Learn: An Evaluation of the Calibrated Peer Review™ Program in Two Neuroscience Courses." The Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, v. 4, n. 1, pp. A34-A39.
  • Robinson, R., 2001, Calibrated Peer Review™: An application to increase student reading and writing skills. The American Biology Teacher, v. 63, n. 7, p. 474-480.
  • Russell, A. A. "Calibrated Peer ReviewTM Awriting and critical-thinking instructional. Tool." (Invention and Impact: Building Excellence in UndergraduateScience, Technology, Engineering and mathematics (STEM) Education. Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2005
  • Simpson, N.; Russell, A. A.; Gunersel, A. B.; Layne. J., 2006. "Calibrated Peer Review™ in Math and Science: Research and Practice." Proceedings of the National STEM Assessment Conference, Washington DC, pp. 266-273.
Related References
  • Falchikov, N.; Goldfinch, J., Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research 70 2000 pp 287-322
  • Kiefer, Kate, (Copyright 1997-2008) What is Writing in the Disciplines? Colorado State University Online: [Accessed September 20, 2008]
  • Lee, P. , 1997. Language in Thinking and Learning: Pedagogy and the New Whorfian Framework, Harvard Educational Review 67: 430-471.
  • Sadler, P.; Good, E., The impact of self- and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment 11(1) 2006, pp1-31