同儕評量是一種有別於傳統的變通性評量（alternative assessment），也即使
一群知識成熟度與學習背景類似的學生，彼此相互評量學習成果，並相互給予回
饋。藉同儕評量的過程來提高學生高層次的思考及學習動機，是許多學科領域中
常廣泛應用的學習策略，對學生的學習成就與學習態度皆有正向的影響。
隨著電腦與網路技術的快速發展，資料的處理、呈現及互動更具即時性，同
儕評量的實施方式也有所改進，從紙筆式同儕評量演變為線上同儕評量。早期以
電腦與網路技術做為同儕評量工具的研究中，對於學習成果呈現與同儕回饋各有
其不同的處理方式，如使用電子試算表軟體透過email 方式實施，或利用全球資
訊網做為展示學習成果的平台，並透過email 來傳遞同儕回饋。演變至今，線上
同儕評量系統皆已將學習成果呈現與同儕回饋整合至全球資訊網平台上。檢討分
析國內外現有線上同儕評量系統之研究，實施過程方面，尚有若干問題有待解
決，例如，1、適當的評審者分配方式，2、雙向的評審者與受評者溝通管道，3、
本研究將針對上述的幾項限制，提出相關策略及實施流程規劃設計，以突顯
同儕評量的設計理念，使參與學生透過本研究所設計的線上同儕評量系統，充分
達到反省思考與批判溝通的目的。對於評審結果公正性及客觀性的問題，本研究
也提出相關預防及檢查策略，藉此減少評審評分偏誤的情形發生。

Peer assessment, an alternative assessment different from traditional ones, has
been widely used in various fields recently. By having students with similar learning
background and mature sense of knowledge resulting in assessing each other and
providing with feedback, peer assessment can promote both students' high-level
thinking skills and their learning motivation.
With the rapid development of computer and network, it is possible to process
and present data instantly; moreover, it is also possible to implement peer assessment
on web-based platform instead of by paper and pencil. In the early stage of using
computer and network technology as an instrument of peer assessment, there were
divergent approaches in appraising learner’s presentation and demonstrating feedback
on the Internet, for example using excel through email or demonstrating learning
outcomes through the web-based platform. At the present time, the peer assessment
system has combined learning presentation with demonstrating feedback firmly.
Research about web-based peer assessment system suggests that there are several
implementation problems requiring to be solved. First, there is no adequate solution to
dispatch reviewers. Second, two-way communication between reviewers and authors
is necessitated. Third, checking grading bias is vital.
The aim of this study was threefold: to solve problems described above, to
address the importance of the design of peer evaluation, and finally, to provide
preventing and checking strategies to reduce the grading bias and make the evaluationas just and objective as possible.

惠子安（2002）。基於凱利方格技術的網路互評系統。元智大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文。
劉旨峰（2000）。網路同儕互評系統：評分員自動分發演算法的設計與考量。第十屆國際電腦輔助教學研討會論文集，頁705-711。
劉旨峰（2002a）。網路同儕互評的探討、實施、評估與增進實施品質的建議。2002電子商務與數位生活研討會（EC2002），台北。民92年9月21日，[On-line] http://203.68.134.87/ec2002/Pdf/E035全文.pdf。
劉旨峰（2002b）。網路同儕評量之研究。國立交通電機學院資訊科學研究所博士論文。
劉得煒、劉聖忠（2000）。電子化同儕評量表的理論與實務用MicroSoft Excel 2000製作並以E-mail方式施行同儕評量。資訊與教育雜誌，80，頁100-111。民92年9月21日，[On-line] http://www.tchcvs.tc.edu.tw/magazine/old/8012.pdf。
網界博覽會網站 http://cyberfair.taiwanschoolnet.org/rubrics1.asp#01
Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., & Mylonas, A (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427-441.
Bhalrrao, A. & Ward, A.(2000). A case study in electronically assisted peer assessment essay. Retrieved September 21, 2003, from the world wide web: http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/people/academic/Abhir.Bhalerao/research/papers/new-alt-j.pdf
Chin, C.T., Liu, E.Z, Lin S.S & Yuan S.M.(2001), A networked peer assessment system based on a Vee heuristic, Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 38(3), 220-30.
Cindy, M H(2002). Peer evaluation and effective review samples. Retrieved September 21, 2003, from the world wide web: http://colton.byuh.edu/isecon/2002/342c/HancheyC.pdf
Cooke, J. C., Drennan, J. D., & Drennan, P. (1997). Peer evaluation as a real life-learning tool. The Technology Teacher, 23-27.
Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment, Innovations in Education and Training International, 37(4), 346-355.
Dochy, F., Segers, M. & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: a review. Studies in Higher Education, 24, 331.
Downing, T., & Brown, I. (1997), Learning by cooperative publishing on the World Wide Web, Active Learning , 7, 14-16.
Edward, F. (2001). Electronic peer review and peer grading in computer-science courses, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33 , Issue 1.
Falchikov, N. (1993). Group process analysis: self and peer assessment of working together in a group. Educational and Training Technology International, 30, 275-284.
Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 175–187.
Freeman, M. (1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289-300.
Hsi, S., & Linn, M. (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: science learning partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hinkle, Dennis E., Wiersma, W. and Jurs, S.G. (1994). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. Boston: Houghton.
LaBonty, J., & Everts-Danielson, K. (1992). Alternative assessment and feedback techniques in methods courses. Clearing House, 65, 186.
Linn, R.L. & Gronlund, N.E.(2000). Measurement and assessment in teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
MacAlpine, J. M. K.(1999). Improving and encouraging peer assessment of student presentations, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(1), 15-25.
Magin, D. (2001). Reciprocity as a source of bias in multiple peer assessment of group work, Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 53-63.
Martinazzi, R.(1998). Design and development of a peer evaluation instrument for student learning teams. Retrieved September 21, 2003, from the world wide web: http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie98/papers/1309.pdf
Melograno, V. J. (1997). Integrating assessment into physical education teaching. Journal of Physical Education, 68, 34-37.
Miller, J.N.（2002）. Alternative forms of formative and summative assessment. Retrieved September 21, 2003, from the world wide web: http://www.economics.ltsn.ac.uk/handbook/assessment/welcome.htm
Oldfield, K.A., & Macalpine, J.M.K. (1995). Peer and self-assessment at the tertiary level: An experiential report. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 125-132.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reitch, K. (1996). The importance of marking criteria in the use of peer assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21, 239-249.
Race, P. (1999) 2000 Tips for lecturers. Kogan Page, London.
Searby, M. and Ewers, T. (1997). An evaluation of the use of peer assessment in higher education: A case study in the school of music, Kingston university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 371-383.
Sivan,A.(2002). Implementing peer assessment to enhance teaching and learning. Retrieved September 21, 2003, from the world wide web: http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ours/ours_pub/nh0102/nh010210_11.pdf
Sluijsmans, D., & Dierick, S. (2002). Student involvement in assessment through peer assessment. Assessment in onderwijs [Assessment in education], 181-202.
Sluijsmans, D., Dochy, F., & Moerkerke, G. (1999). Creating a learning environment by using self-peer- and co-assessment. Learning Environments Research, 1, 293-319.
Sluijsmans, D.M.A., Moerkerke, G., Dochy, F., & Van Merrienboer, J. (2001). Peer assessment in problem based learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27(2), 153-173.
Strachan, I. B., & Wilcox, S. (1996). Peer and self assessment of group work: Developing an effective response to increased enrolment in a third-year course in microclimatology. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 20, 343-353.
Svinicki, M.D. (2001). Encouraging your students to give feedback. In K.G. Lewis (Ed.), Techniques and Strategies for Interpreting Student Evaluations. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 87, 17-24.
The Foundation Coalition. (2002). Peer assessment and peer Evaluation (http://www.foundationcoalition.org/publications/brochures/2002peer_assessment.pdf).
Topping, K (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.
Topping, K., Smith, E., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25, 149-169.
Zhao, Y. (1998). The effects of anonymity on computer-mediated peer review. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 4(4), 311-345.