Stable Grades, Evolving Articulation: A Disconnect Between Applying and Articulating Evaluative Judgments in Teacher Training Peer Assessments

Abstract

The increasing availability of knowledge through digital technologies and generative AI tools highlights the need to develop transferable competences in higher education, and specifically evaluative judgments and professional reflection. Peer assessment combined with structured reflection was offered in a literature course as a means to cultivate these skills. Findings indicate an empirical mismatch between the qualitative and quantitative aspects of assessment, which remains under-researched. The study examines the association between qualitative and quantitative dimensions of peer assessment and whether such associations vary across the educational trajectory. Using a cross-sectional mixed-methods design, we analyzed 379 peer assessments completed by 148 students of education in two courses taught in an academic teacher training college in Israel: a mandatory first-year course (n = 81) and an elective course for third-year students (n=67). Students rated their classmates’ pedagogical presentations on a brief questionnaire according to five didactic criteria, and wrote a personal reflection in response to the question: “What did you learn from this presentation?” Data were analyzed using a multilevel linear model and lexical marker analysis. Findings show no significant differences in quantitative ratings across groups ( M = 3.79, M = 3.52; p > .05) but significant differences were found across groups in the reflection length and detail, favoring the third-year students ( p < .1). The proportion of complex reflections was higher in the third-year groups (15.7% vs 10.9%), with no correlation found between reflection length and assessment rating (r ≈ 0). These findings point to a disconnect between students’ abilities to make evaluative judgments in the form of numerical ratings and the qualitative expression of these judgments in the form of written reflections. This distinction expands the theoretical model and underscores the need for the systematic and gradual integration of structured reflections in peer assessments, beginning from the earliest stages of training.