research-article

Open access

PeerStudio: Rapid Peer Feedback Emphasizes Revision and Improves Performance

Authors:

Chinmay E. Kulkarni,

Michael S. Bernstein,

Scott R. KlemmerAuthors Info & Claims

L@S '15: Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale

Pages 75 - 84

https://doi.org/10.1145/2724660.2724670

Published: 14 March 2015 Publication History

Abstract

Rapid feedback is a core component of mastery learning, but feedback on open-ended work requires days or weeks in most classes today. This paper introduces PeerStudio, an assessment platform that leverages the large number of students' peers in online classes to enable rapid feedback on in-progress work. Students submit their draft, give rubric-based feedback on two peers' drafts, and then receive peer feedback. Students can integrate the feedback and repeat this process as often as they desire. In MOOC deployments, the median student received feedback in just twenty minutes. Rapid feedback on in-progress work improves course outcomes: in a controlled experiment, students' final grades improved when feedback was delivered quickly, but not if delayed by 24 hours. More than 3,600 students have used PeerStudio in eight classes, both massive and in-person. This research demonstrates how large classes can leverage their scale to encourage mastery through rapid feedback and revision.

References

[1]

Anderson, S. and Rodin, J. Is Bad News Always Bad?: Cue and Feedback Effects on Intrinsic Motivation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 19, 6 (1989), 449--467.

[2]

Andrade, H.G. The Effects of Instructional Rubrics on Learning to Write. Current Issues in Education 4, 4 (2001).

[3]

Andrade, H.G. Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching 53, 1 (2005), 27--3.

[4]

André, P., Bernstein, M., and Luther, K. Who gives a tweet? Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work - CSCW '12, ACM Press (2012), 471.

Digital Library

[5]

Balcazar, F.E., Hopkins, B.L., and Suarez, Y. A critical, objective review of performance feedback. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 7, 2 (1986).

[6]

Brooks, M., Basu, S., Jacobs, C., and Vanderwende, L. Divide and Correct: Using Clusters to Grade Short Answers at Scale. Learning at Scale, (2014).

Digital Library

[7]

Buxton, B. Sketching user experiences: getting the design right and the right design. Morgan Kaufmann, 2007.

Digital Library

[8]

Carlson, P.A. and Berry, F.C. Calibrated Peer Review and assessing learning outcomes. Frontiers in Education Conference, (2003).

[9]

Dawes, R.M. The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. American psychologist 34, 7 (1979), 571.

[10]

Dow, S., Fortuna, J., Schwartz, D., Altringer, B., and Klemmer, S. Prototyping dynamics: sharing multiple designs improves exploration, group rapport, and results. Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, (2011), 2807--2816.

Digital Library

[11]

Dow, S.P., Heddleston, K., and Klemmer, S.R. The efficacy of prototyping under time constraints. Proceeding of the ACM conference on Creativity and cognition, ACM Press (2009), 165.

Digital Library

[12]

Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.T., and Tesch-Römer, C. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological review 100, 3 (1993).

[13]

Falchikov, N. and Goldfinch, J. Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of educational research 70, 3 (2000), 287--322.

[14]

Fast, E., Lee, C., Aiken, A., Bernstein, M.S., Koller, D., and Smith, E. Crowd-scale interactive formal reasoning and analytics. Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, (2013).

Digital Library

[15]

Gray, W.D. and Boehm-Davis, D.A. Milliseconds matter: an introduction to microstrategies and to their use in describing and predicting interactive behavior. Journal of experimental psychology. Applied 6, 4 (2000), 322--35.

[16]

Guskey, T.R. Closing Achievement Gaps: Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom's "Learning for Mastery." Journal of Advanced Academics 19, 1 (2007), 8--31.

[17]

Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research 77, 1 (2007), 81--112.

[18]

Heffernan, N., Heffernan, C., Dietz, K., Soffer, D., Pellegrino, J. W. Goldman, S.R., and Dailey, M. Improving Mathematical Learning Outcomes Through Automatic Reassessment and Relearning. AERA, (2012).

[19]

Kim, S.-M., Pantel, P., Chklovski, T., and Pennacchiotti, M. Automatically assessing review helpfulness. Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics (2006), 423--430.

Digital Library

[20]

Kittur, A., Chi, E.H., and Suh, B. Crowdsourcing user studies with Mechanical Turk. Proc. of CHI, ACM Press (2008), 453.

Digital Library

[21]

Kluger, A.N. and DeNisi, A. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin 119, 2 (1996), 254--284.

[22]

Krosnick, J.A. Survey research. Annual review of psychology 50, 1 (1999), 537--567.

[23]

Kulik, J.A. and Kulik, C.-L.C. Timing of Feedback and Verbal Learning. Review of Educational Research 58, 1 (1987), 79--97.

[24]

Kulkarni, C., Socher, R., Bernstein, M.S., and Klemmer, S.R. Scaling Short-answer Grading by Combining Peer Assessment with Algorithmic Scoring. ACM Conf on Learning@Scale, (2014).

Digital Library

[25]

Kulkarni, C., Wei, K.P., Le, H., Chia, D., Papadopoulos, K., Cheng, J., Koller, D., and Klemmer, S.R. Peer and self assessment in massive online classes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 20, 6 (2013), 33.

Digital Library

[26]

Latham, G.P. and Locke, E.A. Self-regulation through goal setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50, 2 (1991), 212--247.

[27]

Marsh, R.L., Landau, J.D., and Hicks, J.L. How examples may (and may not) constrain creativity. Memory & cognition 24, 5 (1996), 669--80.

[28]

Sommers, N. Responding to Student Writing. College Composition and Communication 33, 2 (1982), 148--156.

[29]

Tinapple, D., Olson, L., and Sadauskas, J. CritViz: Web-Based Software Supporting Peer Critique in Large Creative Classrooms. Bulletin of the IEEE Technical Committee on Learning Technology 15, 1 (2013), 29.

Cited By

Zhang YChen HWang JPi ZYang J(2025)The impacts of self-monitoring prompt on provision and uptake of peer feedback and on revision performance: A mixed methods studyStudies in Educational Evaluation10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.10144284(101442)Online publication date: Mar-2025
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101442
Dodds CKharrufa A(2024)Show-and-Tell: An Interface for Delivering Rich Feedback upon Creative Media ArtefactsMultimodal Technologies and Interaction10.3390/mti80300238:3(23)Online publication date: 14-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/mti8030023
Tang XWong SPu KChen XYang YChen Y(2024)VizGroup: An AI-assisted Event-driven System for Collaborative Programming Learning AnalyticsProceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology10.1145/3654777.3676347(1-22)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3654777.3676347
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

PeerStudio: Rapid Peer Feedback Emphasizes Revision and Improves Performance

Recommendations

Employing Wikibook project in a linguistics course to promote peer teaching and learning

Peer teaching and learning are learner-centred approaches with great potential for promoting effective learning, and the fast development of Web 2.0 technology has opened new doors for promoting peer teaching and learning. In this study, we aim to ...
Learning Engagement and Peer Learning in MOOC: A Selective Systematic Review
Augmented Intelligence and Intelligent Tutoring Systems
Abstract
Massive open online courses (MOOCs) improve learning; but their low completion rate remain problematic. Peer learning has been proposed as a method to increase learning engagement in MOOCs, thereby decreasing the dropout rate. However, the ...
Team based assignments in MOOCs: results and observations
L@S '18: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual ACM Conference on Learning at Scale

Teamwork and collaborative learning are considered superior to learning individually by many instructors and didactical theories. Particularly, in the context of e-learning and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) we see great benefits but also great ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

L@S '15: Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale

March 2015

438 pages

ISBN:9781450334112

DOI:10.1145/2724660

General Chair:
Gregor Kiczales
University of British Columbia
,
Program Chairs:
Daniel M. Russell
Google
,
Beverly Woolf
University of Massachusets, Amherst

Copyright © 2015 Owner/Author.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

ACM Ed Board: ACM Ed Board

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 14 March 2015

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

National Science Foundation

Conference

L@S 2015

Sponsor:

ACM Ed Board

L@S 2015: Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale

March 14 - 18, 2015

BC, Vancouver, Canada

Acceptance Rates

L@S '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 23 of 90 submissions, 26%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 117 of 440 submissions, 27%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

143
Total Citations
View Citations
3,277
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)425
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)44

Reflects downloads up to 25 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Zhang YChen HWang JPi ZYang J(2025)The impacts of self-monitoring prompt on provision and uptake of peer feedback and on revision performance: A mixed methods studyStudies in Educational Evaluation10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.10144284(101442)Online publication date: Mar-2025
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101442
Dodds CKharrufa A(2024)Show-and-Tell: An Interface for Delivering Rich Feedback upon Creative Media ArtefactsMultimodal Technologies and Interaction10.3390/mti80300238:3(23)Online publication date: 14-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/mti8030023
Tang XWong SPu KChen XYang YChen Y(2024)VizGroup: An AI-assisted Event-driven System for Collaborative Programming Learning AnalyticsProceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology10.1145/3654777.3676347(1-22)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3654777.3676347
Malik AWoodrow JWang CPiech CMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)TeachNow: Enabling Teachers to Provide Spontaneous, Realtime 1:1 Help in Massive Online CoursesProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653629(708-714)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653629
Palea DVadhul GLee D(2024)Annota: Peer-based AI Hints Towards Learning Qualitative Coding at ScaleProceedings of the 29th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces10.1145/3640543.3645168(455-470)Online publication date: 18-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3640543.3645168
Peng ZChen QShen ZMa XOulasvirta A(2024)DesignQuizzer: A Community-Powered Conversational Agent for Learning Visual DesignProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373218:CSCW1(1-40)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637321
E JYen YPan ILin GLi MJin HChen MXia HDow S(2024)When to Give Feedback: Exploring Tradeoffs in the Timing of Design FeedbackProceedings of the 16th Conference on Creativity & Cognition10.1145/3635636.3656183(292-310)Online publication date: 23-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3635636.3656183
Zhang LChen TZong YGao XStephenson BStone JBattestilli LRebelsky SShoop L(2024)A Peer Grading Approach for Open-ended Programming Projects Based on Binary System and Swiss SystemProceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3626252.3630767(1484-1490)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3626252.3630767
Duan PWarner JLi YHartmann B(2024)Generating Automatic Feedback on UI Mockups with Large Language ModelsProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642782(1-20)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642782
Wang JTang HKantor TSoltani TPopov VWang X(2024)Surgment: Segmentation-enabled Semantic Search and Creation of Visual Question and Feedback to Support Video-Based Surgery LearningProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642587(1-18)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642587
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten