Item

Two Peers Are Better than One: Aggregating Peer Reviews for Computing Assignments is Surprisingly Accurate

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Fulltext URI

Document type

Additional Information

Date

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

Abstract

Scientific peer review, open source software development, wikis, and other domains use distributed review to improve quality of created content by providing feedback to the work's creator. Distributed review is used to assess or improve the quality of a work (e.g., an article). However, it can also provide learning benefits to the participants in the review process. We developed an online review system for beginning computer programming students; it gathers multiple anonymous peer reviews to give students feedback on their programming work. We deployed the system in an introductory programming class and evaluated it in a controlled study. We find that: peer reviews are accurate compared to an accepted evaluation standard, that students prefer reviews from other students with less experience than themselves, and that participating in a peer review process results in better learning outcomes.

Description

Reily, Ken; Finnerty, Pam Ludford; Terveen, Loren (2009): Two Peers Are Better than One: Aggregating Peer Reviews for Computing Assignments is Surprisingly Accurate. Proceedings of the 2009 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work. DOI: 10.1145/1531674.1531692. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 115–124. Sanibel Island, Florida, USA

Keywords

education, collaboration, peer review

Citation

URI

Collections

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By


Load citations
Please note: Providing information about citations is only possible thanks to to the open metadata APIs provided by crossref.org and opencitations.net. These lists may be incomplete due to unavailable citation data.