Peer evaluations for nearly 1,650 students in three different team-based learning economics courses are analyzed for evidence of gender differences in ratings given and received. The analysis controls for general academic skills and economics-specific skills as well as other individual and team characteristics. Females earn higher evaluations than males in introductory and intermediate-level microeconomic theory courses even when conditioning on achievement, but there is no statistically significant difference in a more advanced course. Finally, there is little evidence of gender bias in evaluations given; both males and females rate female teammates higher than male teammates.