Abstract
The business of business education is rapidly evolving because of changing economic and social conditions. At many institutions, class sizes are growing, more curricula is being offered online and traditionally successful pedagogical standards are being threatened unless they are adapted to the emerging economic realities of the 21st century. In response to the economic threats and consumers’ preferences, numerous IT artifacts are being created to facilitate online teaching in the hope that both quality and cost concerns will be ameliorated (albeit not always using the precepts of design science). The purpose of this ‘work-in-progress’ paper is to apply design science principles to outline an algorithm for a computer-aided peer assessment system, named Double-loop Mutual Assessment (DLMA). The project’s goal is to emulate the case method online, improve students’ learning experience and increase grading efficacy. The DLMA yields two IT artifacts: a method and an instantiation. The DLMA method artifact involves two loops of assessment: 1) a summative and formative mutual peer assessment algorithm for essays; and 2) a summative peer assessment of the feedback’s quality. An instantiation of DLMA system – a prototype and a beta-version has been implemented and described. Future directions of researching behavioral and operational aspects of the system are outlined. Potential applications of the artifact’s capabilities beyond the business necessity are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.A., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R., Raths, J., et al.: A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman (2001)
Aoun, C.: Peer-Assessment and Learning Outcomes: Product Deficiency or Process Defectiveness? In: Proceedings of The 34th International Association for Educational Assessment (IAEA) Conference. Cambridge University (2008)
Bandura, A.: Social Learning Through Imitation. University of Nebraska Press (1962)
Bandura, A., Walters, R.H.: Social Learning and Personality Development. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York (1963)
Bloom, B.S., Krathwohl, D.R., Masia, B.B.: Taxonomy of Educational Objectives; The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. In: Bloom, B.S., et al. (eds.), 1st edn. (1956)
Boland Jr., R.J., Tenkasi, R.V., Te’eni, D.: Designing Information Technology to Support Distributed Cognition. Organization Science, 456–475 (1994)
Bostock, S.: Student Peer Assessment. Centre for Learning Technology. Keele University (2000)
Bouzidi, L., Jaillet, A.: Can Online Peer Assessment Be Trusted? Educational Technology Society 12(4), 257–268 (2009)
Brutus, S., Donia, M.B.L.: Improving the Effectiveness of Students in Groups with a Centralized Peer Evaluation System. The Academy of Management Learning and Education (AMLE) 9(4), 652–662 (2010)
Crooks, T.: The Validity of Formative Assessments. University of Leeds (2001)
Declining by Degrees: Higher Education at Risk. PBS (2005)
Doiron, G.: The Value of Online Student Peer Review, Evaluation and Feedback in Higher Education. CDTL Brief 6(9), 1–2 (2003)
Gibbs, G., Jenkins, A.: Teaching Large Classes in Higher Education: How to Maintain Quality with Reduced Resources. Psychology Press (1992)
Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75–105 (2004)
Huhta, A.: Diagnostic and Formative Assessment. In: Spolsky, B., Hult, F.M. (eds.) The Handbook of Educational Linguistics. Blackwell handbooks in linguistics, pp. 469–482. Blackwell Publishing, Malden (2008)
Rittel, H.W.J., Webber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences 4(2), 155–169 (1973)
Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd edn. The MIT Press (1996)
Sluijsmans, D., Prins, F.: A Conceptual Framework for Integrating Peer Assessment in Teacher Education. Studies in Educational Evaluation 32, 6–22 (2006)
Topping, K.: Peer Assessment Between Students in Colleges and Universities. Review of Educational Research 68(3), 249–276 (1998), doi:10.3102/00346543068003249
Topping, K.J.: Trends in Peer Learning. Educational Psychology 25(6), 631–645 (2005), doi:10.1080/01443410500345172
Trahasch, S.: From Peer Assessment Towards Collaborative Learning. In: Presented at the 34th Annual ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE 2004, Savannah, GA, pp. F3F–16 (2004)
Vaishnavi, V., Kuechler, W.: Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating Information and Communication Technology. Auerbach Pub. (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Babik, D., Iyer, L.S., Ford, E.W. (2012). Towards a Comprehensive Online Peer Assessment System. In: Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Kuechler, B. (eds) Design Science Research in Information Systems. Advances in Theory and Practice. DESRIST 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7286. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29863-9_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29863-9_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29862-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-29863-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)