Elda Maria Stafuzza Gonçalves Pires, Hans H C M Savelberg, Stephanie N E Meeuwissen
Students differed in how they valued, provided and responded to peer assessment and in how peer assessment was influenced by contextual factors. We identified three distinct engagement orientations: requirement-, team- and peer-oriented. Requirement-oriented students treated peer assessment as a formal obligation and offered generic feedback. Team-oriented students focused on improving team functioning. Peer-oriented students engaged deeply with peer assessment as a tool for both team and personal development, offering specific and constructive feedback. These orientations were shaped by contextual influences, including fear of interpersonal conflict, proximity to peers, workload and exposure to strong feedback exemplars.
INTRODUCTION: While peer assessment in Team-Based Learning is intended to foster students' academic skills and core competencies, implementation often falls short of meeting these goals. Because students' engagement is shaped by their beliefs and motivation, this research explored how they perceive and engage with peer assessment.
METHODS: We conducted a constructivist grounded theory study at a Brazilian medical school with a 6-year curriculum centred on collaborative Team-Based Learning in rotating teams. Fifteen students were purposefully sampled and interviewed. Data were analysed inductively in an iterative way, using focused coding and constant comparison.
RESULTS: Students differed in how they valued, provided and responded to peer assessment and in how peer assessment was influenced by contextual factors. We identified three distinct engagement orientations: requirement-, team- and peer-oriented. Requirement-oriented students treated peer assessment as a formal obligation and offered generic feedback. Team-oriented students focused on improving team functioning. Peer-oriented students engaged deeply with peer assessment as a tool for both team and personal development, offering specific and constructive feedback. These orientations were shaped by contextual influences, including fear of interpersonal conflict, proximity to peers, workload and exposure to strong feedback exemplars.
DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that variation in peer assessment engagement reflects distinct context-sensitive orientations rather than uniform behaviour. Rather than a procedural activity, peer assessment is shaped by an interaction between context and students' motivational stance, which influences whether feedback is generic, team-focused or developmental. Recognising these patterns could inform strategies to reduce social risk, strengthen feedback literacy and support more meaningful engagement with peer assessment.