/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
The ability to self and peer assess performance within a multi-disciplinary group is a valuable skill and one of many detailed in the CDIO syllabus as being desirable for graduate engineers. The design, build and test environment in which a student applies technical knowledge and develops teambuilding and other professional skills such as self and peer assessment is complex and challenging for both students and assessors. Operating such activities as multi-disciplinary and multi-national projects adds further layers of complexity.
This paper seeks to examine the reliability of students’ self and peer assessments in such complex team environments. The study examined peer ratings from 5 teams from Queen’s University Belfast (QUB) and 6 teams from the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm, and involved in total 105 students from 6 different disciplines. The analysis suggested that students tended to show bias in favour of those from the same discipline and against those from a minority grouping or from outside of their own university. Further analysis from many more institutions would be required to determine if such tendencies are generally typical.