Lightweight preliminary peer review: Does in-class peer review make sense?

SIGCSE 2007: 38th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 266-270

  Denning, Tamara ^a   Kelly, Michael ^a   Lindquist, David ^a   Malani, Roshni ^a   Griswold, William G ^a   Simon, Beth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Active learning; Educational technology; Peer review

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; CRITICAL PATH ANALYSIS; CURRICULA; SET THEORY; STUDENTS;

ACTIVE LEARNING; EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY; PEER REVIEW;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 34748862282     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1227310.1227406     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (9)

1. R. Anderson, R. Anderson, B. Simon, S. Wolfman, T. VanDeGrift, and K. Yasuhara. Experiences with a Tablet PC Based Lecture Presentation System in Computer Science Courses. SIGCSE 2004.
2. T. Denning, W. G. Griswold, B. Simon, and M. Wilkerson. Multimodal Communication in the Classroom: What does it mean for us? SIGCSE 2006.
3. A. Fekete, J. Kay, J. Kingston, and K. Wimalaratne, Supporting reflection in introductory computer science. SIGCSE 2000.
4. E. Gehringer, Electronic Peer Review and Peer Grading in Computer-Science Courses. SIGCSE 2001.
5. S. E. George, Learning and the reflective journal in computer science. In Proc. of the Australasian Conference on Computer Science - Volume 4. 2002.
6. R. Pargas, D. Shah. Things are Clicking in Computer Science Courses. SIGCSE 2006.
7. S. Sullivan. Reciprocal Peer Reviews, SIGCSE 1994.
8. K Topping. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research 68:3, Fall 1998, pp. 249-276.
9. A. Trivedi, D. Kar, H. Patterson-McNeill. Automatic Assignment Management and Peer Evaluation. CCSC South Central, 2003.