Natural language processing techniques for researching and improving peer feedback

Journal of Writing Research

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 155-176

  Xiong, Wenting ^a   Litmaan, Diane ^a   Schunn, Christian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Artificial intelligeence; Coding; Feedback features; Peer review

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875279968     PISSN: 20301006     EISSN: 22943307     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.17239/jowr-2012.04.02.3     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Ashbaugh, H., Johnstone, K. M., & Warfield, T. D. (2002). Outcome assessment of a writing-skill improvement initiative: Results and methodological implications. Issues in Accounting Education, 17(2), 124-148.
2. Attaliand, Y., & Burstein, J. (2006). Automated essay scoring with e-rater v.2. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 26.
3. Burges, C. J. C. (1998). A tutorial on support vector machines for pattern recognition. Data mining and knowledge discovery, 2(2), 121-167. doi: 10.1023/A:1009715923555
4. Chapman, O. L., & Fiore, M. A. (2000). Calibrated peer review. Journal of Interactive Instruction Development, Winter, 11-15.
5. Cho, K. (2008). Machine classification of peer comments in physics. Paper presented at the 1 st International Conference on Educational Data Mining, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
6. Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328-338. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
7. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48(3), 409-426.
8. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2010). Developing writing skills through students giving instructional explanations. In M. K. Stein & L. Kucan (Eds.), Instructional Explanations in the Disciplines: Talk, Texts and Technology. New York: Springer.
9. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing - Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260-294.
10. Cohen, M., & Riel, M. (1989). The Effect of Distant Audiences on Students Writing. American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 143-159.
11. Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 113-143.
12. Dönmez, P., Rose, C. P., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2005). Supporting CSCL with automatic corpus analysis technology. Paper presented at the 2005 conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning.
13. Ericsson, P. F., & Haswell, R. H. (Eds.). (2006). Machine scoring of student essays: Truth and consequences. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press.
14. Ernst-Gerlach, A., & Crane, G. (2008). Identifying Quotations in Reference Works and Primary Materials. Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries, 5173, 78-87.
15. Goldin, I. M., Ashley, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2012). Redesigning Educational Peer Review Interactions Using Computer Tools: An Introduction. Journal of Writing Research, 4(2), 111-119.
16. Graesser, A. C., & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Use of computers to analyze and score essays and open-ended verbal responses. In H. Cooper, P. Camic, R. Gonzalez, D. Long & A. Panter (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
17. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing Next: Effective Strategies to Improve Writing of Adolescents in Middle and High School - A Report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
18. Katstra, J., Tollefson, N., & Gilbert, E. (1987). The Effects of Peer Evaluation on Attitude Toward Writing and Writing Fluency of Ninth Grade Students. Journal of Educational Research, 80(3), 168-172.
19. Kiuhara, S. A., Graham, S., & Hawken, L. S. (2009). Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 136-160.
20. Leijen, D. A. J., & Leontjeva, A. (2012). Linguistic and review features of peer feedback and their effect on the implementation of changes in academic writing: A corpus based investigation. Journal of Writing Research, 4(2), 178-202.
21. Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewers own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 30-43.
22. Malakasiotis, P. (2009). Paraphrase recognition using machine learning to combine similarity measures. Paper presented at the 47th Annual Meeting of ACL and the 4th Int. Joint Conf. on Natural Language Processing of AFNLP.
23. McNamara, D. S., Crossley, S. A., & McCarthy, P. M. (2010). Linguistic features of writing quality. Written Communication, 27, 57-86.
24. McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., McCarthy, P. M., & Graesser, A. C. (2010). Coh-Metrix: Capturing linguistic features of cohesion. Discourse Processes, 47, 292-330.
25. Nelson, M. M., Melot, B., Stevens, C., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). The effects of skill diversity in peer feedback: Its what you dont know. Paper presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.
26. Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375-401.
27. Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
28. Patchan, M. M., Charney, D., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). A validation study of students' end comments: Comparing comments by students, a writing instructor, and a content instructor. Journal of Writing Research, 1(2), 124-152.
29. Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2010). Impact of Diverse Abilities on Learning to Write through Peer-Review. Paper presented at the 32nd annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Portland, OR.
30. Prichard, J. R. (2005). Writing to learn: An evaluation of the calibrated peer review(tm)program in two neuroscience courses. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 4(1), A34-A39.
31. Proske, A., Narciss, S., & McNamara, D. S. (2010). Computer-based scaffolding to facilitate students' development of expertise in academic writing. Journal of Research in Reading, 35(2), 136-152.
32. Sadler, P., & Good, E. (2006). The impact of self-and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 1-31.
33. Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.
34. Topping, K. J. (2008). Peer Assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20-27.
35. van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Peer Assessment in University Teaching: Evaluating Seven Course Designs. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(1), 19-36.
36. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
37. Wang, Y.-C., Joshi, M., Rose, C. P., Fischer, F., Weinberger, A., & Stegmann, K. (2007). Context Based Classification for Automatic Collaborative Learning Process Analysis. Paper presented at the 2007 Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education.
38. Wilson, T., Wiebe, J. M., & Hoffmann, P. (2005). Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. Paper presented at the Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.
39. Witten, I. H., & Frank, E. (2005). Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann.
40. Wooley, R., Was, C., Schunn, C., & Dalton, D. (2008). The effects of feedback elaboration on the giver of feedback. Paper presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.
41. Xiong, W., & Litman, D. (2010). Identifying Problem Localization in Peer-Review Feedback. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Pittsburgh, PA.
42. Xiong, W., & Litman, D. (2011). Understanding Differences in Perceived Peer-Review Helpfulness using Natural Language Processing. Paper presented at the 6th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (ACL-HLT Workshop). Portland, OR.
43. Xiong, W., Litman, D., & Schunn, C. D. (2010). Assessing Reviewers Performance Based on Mining Problem Localization in Peer-Review Data. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Educational Data Mining, Pittsburgh, PA.