Reliability of Self- and Peer-assessment in Evaluating EFL Students’ Oral Presentations in Higher Education

Abstract

The formative potential of peer- and self-assessment in EFL contexts has been investigated extensively but much controversy still surrounds the reliability and validity of these modes of assessment. This article explores the reliability of self- and peer-assessment to evaluate oral presentations in English at university level and their effect on student performance. In a fifteen-week longitudinal study, students’ oral presentations (n=65) were co-evaluated by teachers, peers, and students themselves on three occasions, five weeks apart, using an analytic scoring rubric. The mean scores for the three types of assessment (self-assessment, peer-assessment, and teacher-assessment) were compared and analysed to determine the consistency and reliability of the evaluations. The aim was to investigate whether there is a positive correlation between the three types of raters and to determine whether peer and self-assessment are reliable tools that can be used alongside teacher assessment. The findings confirm not only the growing alignment in ratings among the three rater pairs, which improves over time, but also suggest that engaging students in co-evaluation fosters a deeper understanding of their own performance and enhances their oral presentation skills.