Multi-actor assessment in the modern school

Abstract

The study aims to theoretically define the content of multi-actor assessment in modern schools as an organized interaction among the subjects of assessment activities. The article reveals the functions and boundaries of teacher and student participation in self-assessment and peer-assessment roles, substantiating the distinct pedagogical status of their evaluative judgments. It is demonstrated that discrepancies between assessments can serve as a source of valuable pedagogical information when accounting for their direction, stability, and level of argumentation. The conditions for the substantive alignment of evaluative judgments are identified: a shared criteria-based framework, argumentation and comparison of positions, and the pedagogical organization and moderation of assessment interaction. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the theoretical refinement of the concept of “multi-actor assessment” as an organized interaction among assessment subjects who differ in their functions and degrees of responsibility; in differentiating the pedagogical status of evaluative judgments made by the teacher, the self-assessing student, and the peer-assessing student; and in identifying the direction, stability, and level of argumentation of assessment discrepancies as characteristics possessing diagnostic value. As a result of the theoretical analysis, three main subject roles are differentiated: the teacher, the self-assessing student, and the peer-assessing student. The article highlights three conditions under which the evaluative judgments of these actors achieve substantive alignment: the availability of a shared and transparent criteria-based framework, the argumentation and comparison of the judgments themselves, and the pedagogical organization and moderation of assessment interaction.

References

1. Бойцова Е. Г. Формирующее оценивание образовательных результатов учащихся в современной школе // Человек и образование. 2014. № 1 (38).
2. Воронцов А. Б. Педагогическая технология контроля и оценки учебной деятельности: образовательная система Д. Б. Эльконина – В. В. Давыдова. М.: Издатель Рассказов А. И., 2002.
3. Давыдов В. В. Теория развивающего обучения. М.: ИНТОР, 1996.
4. Землянская Е. Н. Формирующее оценивание образовательных достижений учащихся в начальном общем образовании: подготовка учителей // Педагогика. Вопросы теории и практики. 2022. Т. 7. Вып. 4. https://doi.org/10.30853/ped20220071
5. Родиков И. Е. Дидактическая модель формирования социолингвистической уместности в академическом письме на иностранном языке у бакалавров-лингвистов при интеграции подсказок на основе искусственного интеллекта и взаимооценивания // Педагогика. Вопросы теории и практики. 2026. Т. 11. Вып. 4. https://doi.org/10.30853/ped20260091
6. Эльконин Д. Б. О структуре учебной деятельности // Эльконин Д. Б. Избранные психологические труды. М.: Педагогика, 1989.
7. Andrade H., Valtcheva A. Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment // Theory Into Practice. 2009. Vol. 48. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577544
8. Black P., Wiliam D. Assessment and classroom learning // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 1998. Vol. 5. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
9. Dochy F., Segers M., Sluijsmans D. The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: a review // Studies in Higher Education. 1999. Vol. 24. No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079912331379935
10. Double K. S., McGrane J. A., Hopfenbeck T. N. The impact of peer assessment on academic performance: a meta-analysis of control group studies // Educational Psychology Review. 2020. Vol. 32. No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09510-3
11. Hattie J., Timperley H. The power of feedback // Review of Educational Research. 2007. Vol. 77. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
12. Panadero E., Brown G. T. L., Strijbos J. W. The future of student self-assessment: a review of known unknowns and potential directions // Educational Psychology Review. 2016. Vol. 28. No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9350-2
13. Sadler D. R. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems // Instructional Science. 1989. Vol. 18. No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
14. Topping K. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities // Review of Educational Research. 1998. Vol. 68. No. 3. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068003249
15. Topping K. J. Peer assessment // Theory Into Practice. 2009. Vol. 48. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569
16. Yan Z., Lao H., Panadero E., Fernández-Castilla B., Yang L., Yang M. Effects of self-assessment and peer-assessment interventions on academic performance: a meta-analysis // Educational Research Review. 2022. Vol. 37. Art. 100484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100484
17. Yan Z., Panadero E., Wang X., Zhan Y. A systematic review on students’ perceptions of self-assessment: usefulness and factors influencing implementation // Educational Psychology Review. 2023. Vol. 35. Art. 81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09799-1

Author information

About this article

Publication history

• Received: August 26, 2026.
• Published: September 25, 2026.

Keywords

• педагогическое оценивание
• многосубъектность оценивания
• самооценивание
• взаимооценивание
• школьное образование
• pedagogical assessment
• multi-actor assessment
• self-assessment
• peer assessment
• school education

Copyright

© 2026 The Author(s)
© 2026 Gramota Publishing, LLC

User license

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)