The Science Behind Peer Assessment
CoStudy's methodology is grounded in decades of educational and organizational psychology research.
Research-Backed Methodology
Peer evaluation has been studied extensively in educational research since the 1980s. The evidence is clear: when designed properly, peer assessments are a valid, reliable, and uniquely valuable tool for both measuring and developing collaboration skills.
The key word is “properly.” Unstructured peer evaluation — where students simply rate each other on a generic scale — produces unreliable, biased results. Structured peer evaluation — with carefully designed behavioral questions, anonymization, and multi-rater aggregation — produces results that correlate strongly with expert assessments and provide actionable feedback that students can use to improve.
CoStudy was built from the ground up on these research principles. Every aspect of our platform — from the questions we ask to the reports we generate — is informed by what the evidence says works.
Key Research Areas
Peer Assessment Validity
Decades of research confirm that structured peer assessments produce reliable, valid results. Falchikov and Goldfinch's (2000) meta-analysis of 56 studies found strong correlation between peer and instructor assessments when evaluations use well-designed criteria. CoStudy's instruments are built on this foundation, using behavioral anchors that improve agreement between raters.
Bias Reduction
Bias in peer evaluation is real but manageable. Research shows that three strategies dramatically reduce bias: behavioral question design (asking about observable actions rather than traits), anonymization (removing social pressure from ratings), and aggregation (combining multiple ratings to cancel individual biases). CoStudy implements all three by default.
Formative Assessment
Black and Wiliam's (1998) landmark review demonstrated that formative assessment — feedback designed to improve learning in progress — produces significant gains across educational contexts. CoStudy applies this principle by enabling mid-project peer evaluations that give students actionable feedback while there's still time to improve their teamwork.
Team Effectiveness
Google's Project Aristotle and decades of team science research show that psychological safety is the top predictor of team effectiveness. Structured feedback processes create the conditions for psychological safety by normalizing honest communication about team dynamics. CoStudy's framework helps teams build the trust that makes collaboration productive.
How We Apply the Research
- Behavioral questions designed with team psychology researchers to ensure validity
- Anonymous evaluations that encourage honest, unbiased feedback
- Multi-rater aggregation that produces reliable scores from peer input
- Formative mid-project check-ins alongside summative end-of-project assessments
- Self-assessment paired with peer assessment to build metacognition
- Actionable student report cards that focus on growth, not just grades
Ready to transform how you run peer evaluations?
Join 50+ universities using CoStudy to save time, gain insights, and help students become better teammates.