In medical image analysis, it is typical to collect multiple annotations, each from a different clinical expert or rater, in the expectation that possible diagnostic errors could be mitigated. Meanwhile, from the computer vision practitioner viewpoint, it has been a common practice to adopt the ground-truth labels obtained via either the majorityvote or simply one annotation from a preferred rater. This process, however, tends to overlook the rich information of agreement or disagreement ingrained in the raw multirater annotations. To address this issue, we propose to explicitly model the multi-rater (dis-)agreement, dubbed MRNet, which has two main contributions. First, an expertise-aware inferring module or EIM is devised to embed the expertise level of individual raters as prior knowledge, to form high-level semantic features. Second, our approach is capable of reconstructing multi-rater gradings from coarse predictions, with the multi-rater (dis-)agreement cues being further exploited to improve the segmentation performance. To our knowledge, our work is the first in producing calibrated predictions under different expertise levels for medical image segmentation. Extensive empirical experiments are conducted across five medical segmentation tasks of diverse imaging modalities. In these experiments, superior performance of our MRNet is observed comparing to the state-of-the-arts, indicating the effectiveness and applicability of our MRNet toward a wide range of medical segmentation tasks.