[[abstract]]Thirty-four undergraduates used Web-based self- and peer-assessment procedures for evaluating proposals in experimental psychology courses. Students presented their proposals and commented on the proposals of others on the Web. Results indicated that proposal observation and peer interaction enhanced the quality of students' proposals. These procedures also enhanced the interrater reliability of within-group members' proposal ratings.
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.