PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
December 1, 2013ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction393 citationsOpen Access

Peer and self assessment in massive online classes

CKChinmay KulkarniKWKoh Pang WeiHLHuy Le

Key Points

  • The aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of peer and self-assessment in a large online class setting.
  • Two iterations of a large online class were analyzed for grading accuracy and bias.
  • Experiments were conducted to test the impact of feedback on grading accuracy.
  • Customizable rubrics and feedback snippets were introduced to enhance peer assessment quality.
  • 42.9% of students' grades were within 5% of staff grades; 65.5% within 10%.
  • Average student self-assessment was 7% higher than staff assessments.
  • Median grading error decreased from 12.4% to 9.9% after rubric revisions.

Abstract

Peer and self-assessment offer an opportunity to scale both assessment and learning to global classrooms. This article reports our experiences with two iterations of the first large online class to use peer and self-assessment. In this class, peer grades correlated highly with staff-assigned grades. The second iteration had 42.9% of students’ grades within 5% of the staff grade, and 65.5% within 10%. On average, students assessed their work 7% higher than staff did. Students also rated peers’ work from their own country 3.6% higher than those from elsewhere. We performed three experiments to improve grading accuracy. We found that giving students feedback about their grading bias increased subsequent accuracy. We introduce short, customizable feedback snippets that cover common issues with assignments, providing students more qualitative peer feedback. Finally, we introduce a data-driven approach that highlights high-variance items for improvement. We find that rubrics that use a parallel sentence structure, unambiguous wording, and well-specified dimensions have lower variance. After revising rubrics, median grading error decreased from 12.4% to 9.9%.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kulkarni et al. (2013) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a10e484acd1dbe0646494a9https://doi.org/10.1145/2505057
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Enhancing learning through self-assessment1996 · 672 citations
  2. 2Decision-Theoretic Control of Crowd-Sourced Workflows2010 · 126 citations
  3. 3Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design2007 · 1,391 citations
  4. 4Evaluating an Automatically Scorable, Open‐Ended Response Type for Measuring Mathematical Reasoning in Computer‐Adaptive Tests1997 · 64 citations
  5. 5The Architecture of the Ecole Des Beaux-Arts1984 · 46 citations