The student view on online peer reviews

Proceedings of the Conference on Integrating Technology into Computer Science Education, ITiCSE

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 26-30

  Bauer, Christine ^a   Figl, Kathrin ^b   Derntl, Michael ^a   Beran, Peter Paul ^a   Kabicher, Sonja ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS   (Austria)

Author keywords

Communication; Online assessment; Peer assessment; Peer review

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SCIENCE COURSE; DIFFERENT MODES; ON-LINE ASSESSMENT; ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE; PEER ASSESSMENT; PEER REVIEW; PEER-REVIEW PROCESS; POSITIVE EFFECTS; QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE METHODS; RESEARCH QUESTIONS; SCIENTIFIC WRITING; STUDENT LEARNING;

COMPUTER SCIENCE; EDUCATION COMPUTING; ENGINEERING EDUCATION; ENGINEERING RESEARCH; INNOVATION; QUALITY ASSURANCE; TEACHING; TECHNICAL WRITING; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

STUDENTS;

EID: 77049116281     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1562877.1562892     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Bailey, C. D., Hermanson, D. R., Louwers, T. J. (2007). An Examination of the Peer Review Process in Accounting. Proc. CAAA 2006 Annual Conference.
2. Bauer, C., Figl, K. (2006). Differences of Online and Face-to-Face Peer Reviews Regarding Type and Quality. Proc. CELDA 2006 (Barcelona, Spain), 423-428.
3. Bauer, C., Figl, K., Derntl, M., Beran, P. P., Kabicher, S. (2009). Der Einsatz von Online-Peer-Reviews als kollaborative Lernform. Proc. 9th International Conference on Business Informatics 2009 (WI 2009) (Vienna, Austria), 421-430.
4. Brown, T. 2004. Peer Review and the Acceptance of New Scientific Ideas: Discussion Paper from a Working Party on Equipping the Public with an Understanding of Peer Review (No. 0-9547974-0-X): London, UK.
5. Carlson, P. A., Berry, F. C. (2003). Calibrated Peer Review(TM) and Assessing Learning Outcomes. Proc. 33rd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE03) (Boulder, CO), F3E/1-6.
6. Chinn, D. (2005). Peer Assessment in the Algorithms Course. Proc. 10th annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE'05) (Caparica, Portugal), 69-73.
7. Coit, C. (2004). Peer Review in an Online College Writing Course. Proc. 4th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT'04) (Joensuu, Finland), 902-903.
8. Derntl, M. (2006). A Generic View on Online Peer-Evaluation. Proc. World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia, & Telecommunications ED-MEDIA 2006 (Orlando, FL), 1809-1816.
9. Dochy, F. J. R. C., Segers, M., Sluijsmans, D. M. A. 1999. The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education 24, 331-350.
10. Figl, K., Bauer, C., Mangler, J., Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2006). Online versus Face-to-Face Peer Team Reviews. Proc. 36th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE06) (San Diego, CA), T1H/7-T1H/12.
11. Galin, D. 2004. Software Quality Assurance: From Theory to Implementation. Pearson Education, Harlow, UK.
12. Gehringer, E. F. (2000). Strategies and Mechanisms for Electronic Peer Review. Proc. 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (Kansas City, MO), F1B/2-F1B/7.
13. Hansen, J. G. 2005. Cooperative Learning Methods and the Teaching of English Writing: Peer Response. STETS Language & Communication Review 4, 9-14.
14. Huang, S.-Y. (1998). A Comparison Between Chinese EFL Students' Peer Response Sessions Held on Networked Computers and Those Held in a Face-to-Face Setting. Proc. 6th International NELLE-Conference (Bielefeld, Germany).
15. Lin, C.-S., Chang, K.-E., Lee, C.-L., Sung, Y.-T. (2002). Improving Experiment Project Evaluation through Web-based Self- and Peer Assessment. Proc. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2002 (SITE 2002) (Nashville, TN), 2432-2434.
16. Liu, J., Sadler, R. W. 2003. The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versus traditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2, 193-227.
17. Mayring, P. 1983/2003. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse (Qualitative Content Analysis). Beltz, Weinheim, Germany.
18. Sitthiworachart, J., Joy, M. (2003). Web-based Peer Assessment in Learning Computer Programming. Proc. 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT'03) (Athens, Greece), 180-184.
19. Sullivan, N., Pratt, E. 1996. A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System 29, 491-501.
20. Trahasch, S. (2004). From Peer Assessment Towards Collaborative Learning. Proc. 34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (Savannah, GA), F3F/16-F13F/20.
21. Tuzi, F. 2004. The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computers and Compositions 21, 217-235.
22. Ware, M., Monkman, M. (2007). Peer Review in Scholarly Journals: Perspective of the Scholarly Community - an International Study: Publishing Research Consortium.
23. Wiegers, K. E. 2002. Peer Reviews in Software: A Practical Guide. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.