Advertisement

Exploring the Peer Assessment Process Supported by the Enhanced Moodle Workshop in a Computer Programming Course

  • Gabriel Badea
  • Elvira Popescu
  • Andrea Sterbini
  • Marco TemperiniEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1008)

Abstract

Supporting peer assessment in learning management systems is an important educational issue. The widespread Moodle platform relies on a plugin called Workshop for providing such peer evaluation functionality. In a previous work, we proposed an extension of the plugin with student modeling capabilities, based on a Bayesian Network approach. In the current paper we aim to experimentally validate this Enhanced Workshop module, by using it in the context of an Introduction to Computer Programming course. An experience report of the peer assessment process is provided, focusing on the support offered by the module. The results are also analyzed, exploring the relationship between student models and grades.

Keywords

Peer evaluation Moodle Bayesian network model Student model 

References

  1. 1.
    Alfaro, L., Shavlovsky, M.: CrowdGrader: a tool for crowdsourcing the evaluation of homework assignments. In: Proceedings of SIGCSE 2014, pp. 415–420. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Badea, G., Popescu, E., Sterbini, A., Temperini, M.: A service-oriented architecture for student modeling in peer assessment environments. In: Proceedings of SETE 2018. LNCS 11284, pp. 32–37. Springer (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Badea, G., Popescu, E., Sterbini, A., Temperini, M.: Integrating enhanced peer assessment features in moodle learning management system. In: Proceedings ICSLE 2019. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology, pp. 135–144. Springer (2019)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Marsico, M., Sciarrone, F., Sterbini, A., Temperini, M.: Supporting mediated peer-evaluation to grade answers to open-ended questions. EURASIA J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 13(4), 1085–1106 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kulkarni, C., Socher, R., Bernstein, M.S., Klemmer, S.R.: Scaling short-answer grading by combining peer assessment with algorithmic scoring. In: Proceedings of L@S 2014. pp. 99–108. ACM Press (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu, N., Carless, D.: Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment. Teach. High. Educ. 11(3), 279–290 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moodle Learning Management System. https://moodle.org/. Accessed 07 Feb 2019
  8. 8.
    Pearce, J., Mulder, R., Baik, C.: Involving students in peer review. case studies and practical strategies for university teaching. Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Politz, J.G., Patterson, D., Krishnamurthi, S., Fisler, K.: CaptainTeach: multi-stage, in-flow peer review for programming assignments. In: Proceedings of ITiCSE 2014, pp. 267–272 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Topping, K., Smith, E.F., Swanson, I., Elliot, A.: Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assess. Eval. High. Educ. 25(2), 149–169 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Workshop plugin. https://docs.moodle.org/23/en/Workshop_module. Accessed 07 Feb 2019
  12. 12.
    Wright, J., Thornton, C., Leyton-Brown, K.: Mechanical TA: partially automated high-stakes peer grading. In: Proceedings of SIGCSE 2015, pp. 96–101. ACM (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriel Badea
    • 1
  • Elvira Popescu
    • 1
  • Andrea Sterbini
    • 2
  • Marco Temperini
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Computers and Information Technology DepartmentUniversity of CraiovaCraiovaRomania
  2. 2.Computer, Control, and Management Engineering DepartmentSapienza UniversityRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations