Peer Reviews don't work at University

A slight departure today to a topic which is more relevant to current students. I am in a sense using this post as a warm up for my (potentially) paid writing and it is an issue I have seen effect friends recently.

A peer review by nature suggests bias. Your peer is likely to have an opinion and they gain/lose nothing by their decision. Peer reviews in the form of recommendations are common on linkedin. I can recommend so and so as he did an excellent job with me. I always think this loses some of its strength if the same person then reviews him back. Yes, he may have done a good job, but in giving him a dazzling review you are increasing the liklihood you will get one back.

At University the idea that any piece of work, that even 1% of it is marked by peer review is prepostorous. I can only assume that it is meant to be a demonstration of maturity, impartiality and supposedly a chance for you have to have your say. In reality it is simply nothing of the sort. It turns academic work into a popularity contest and I am flabbergasted that any lecturer still views it as a good idea.

After all there will always be people who vote highly for their friends, regardless of what there friends have actually done. Therefore the more friends you have the better you will do. People with grudges against each other are likely to mark harshly and even the person trying to be the fairest and most impartial will struggle when marking their boyfriend/girlfriend/best friend. There will also be bargaining, questioning,

"what did you give me?"
"if you give me an 8 I will give you an 8"


I remember all this from school when nothing was at stake. At university when the outcome of your degree and possibly your livelihood is in focus, to expect everyone to mark fairly is quite simply naive.

As someone who never strode the lines of popularity, any chance for peer review was something I dreaded. I knew I wasnt being marked on my actual performance on a task, but on a hundred other factors which were utterly unrelated. Even if someone tries to be impartial they arent going to be cruel to their friends and they certainly won't fail them.

Ultimately if noone votes fairly and the actual content of the work becomes irrelevant then all peer reviewing actually is, is an exercise in futility.