Abstract
A peer review system that automatically evaluates student feedback comments was deployed in a university research methods course. The course required students to create an argument diagram to justify a hypothesis, then use this diagram to write a paper introduction. Diagram and paper first drafts were both reviewed by peers. During peer review, the system automatically analyzed the quality of student comments with respect to localization (i.e. pinpointing the source of the comment in the diagram or paper). Two localization models (one for diagram and one for paper reviews) triggered a system scaffolding intervention to improve review quality whenever the review was predicted to have a ratio of localized comments less than a threshold. Reviewers could then choose to revise their comments or ignore the scaffolding. Our analysis of data from system logs demonstrates that diagram and paper localization models have high prediction accuracy, and that a larger portion of student feedback comments are successfully localized after scaffolded revision.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., Struyven, K.: Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction 20(4), 304–315 (2010)
Cho, K.: Machine Classification of Peer Comments in Physics. In: Proceedings of 1st international conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM), pp. 192–196 (2008)
Cho, K., Schunn, C.D.: Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education 48(3), 409–426 (2007)
Kumar, A.N.: Error-Flagging support for testing and its effect on adaptation. In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds.) ITS 2010, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6094, pp. 359–368. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Lippman, J., Elfenbein, M., Diabes, M., Luchau, C., Lynch, C., Ashley, K.D., Schunn, C.D.: To Revise or Not To Revise: What Influences Undergrad Authors to Implement Peer Critiques of Their Argument Diagrams? In: International Society for the Psychology of Science and Technology 2012 Conference, Poster (2012)
Nelson, M.M., Schunn, C.D.: The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science 37(4), 375–401 (2009)
Nguyen, H.V., Litman, D.J.: Identifying Localization in Peer Reviews of Argument Diagrams. In: Lane, H.C., Yacef, K., Mostow, J., Pavlik, P. (eds.) AIED 2013. LNCS, vol. 7926, pp. 91–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Ramachandran, L., Gehringer, E.F.: Automated assessment of review quality using latent semantic analysis. In: 11th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 136–138 (2011)
Razzaq, L., Heffernan, N.T.: Hints: is it better to give or wait to be asked? In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds.) ITS 2010, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6094, pp. 349–358. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., McLaren, B.M.: Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 5(1), 43–102 (2010)
Xiong, W., Litman, D.: Identifying problem localization in peer-review feedback. In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds.) ITS 2010, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6095, pp. 429–431. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)
Xiong, W., Litman, D.: Automatically Predicting Peer-Review Helpfulness. In: Proceedings of 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (ACL-HLT), pp. 502–507 (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Nguyen, H., Xiong, W., Litman, D. (2014). Classroom Evaluation of a Scaffolding Intervention for Improving Peer Review Localization. In: Trausan-Matu, S., Boyer, K.E., Crosby, M., Panourgia, K. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8474. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07221-0_34
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07221-0_34
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07220-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07221-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)