CaptainTeach: Multi-stage, in-flow peer review for programming assignments

ITICSE 2014 - Proceedings of the 2014 Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 267-272

  Politz, Joe Gibbs ^a   Patterson, Daniel ^a   Krishnamurthi, Shriram ^a   Fisler, Kathi ^b  

^a BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WPI ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Learning environments; Peer review; Testing

Indexed keywords

TEACHING; TESTING;

LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS; MULTIPLE STAGES; PEDAGOGICAL ISSUES; PEER REVIEW; PROGRAMMING ASSIGNMENTS; PROGRAMMING ENVIRONMENT; PROGRAMMING PROBLEM; UNDERGRADUATE COURSES;

ENGINEERING RESEARCH;

EID: 84904497072     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2591708.2591738     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. K. Buffiardi and S. H. Edwards. Impacts of adaptive feedback on teaching test-driven development. In SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 2013.
2. N. Clark. Peer testing in software engineering projects. In Australasian Computing Education Conference, 2004.
3. T. Denning, M. Kelly, D. Lindquist, R. Malani, W. Griswold, and B. Simon. Lightweight preliminary peer review: does in-class peer review make sense? In SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pages 266-270, 2007.
4. M. Felleisen, R. B. Findler, M. Flatt, and S. Krishnamurthi. How to Design Programs. MIT Press, 2002.
5. C. D. Hundhausen, A. Agrawal, and P. Agarwal. Talking about code: Integrating pedagogical code reviews into early computing courses. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 13(3), Aug. 2013.
6. C. Kulkarni, K. P. Wei, H. Le, D. Chia, K. Papadopoulos, J. Cheng, D. Koller, and S. R. Klemmer. Peer and self assessment in massive online classes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 2013.
7. L. Ramachandran and E. F. Gehringer. Reusable learning objects through peer review: The Expertiza approach. In Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 2007.
8. K. Reily, P. L. Finnerty, and L. Terveen. Two peers are better than one: Aggregating peer reviews for computing assignments is surprisingly accurate. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work, 2009.
9. J. Smith, J. Tessler, E. Kramer, and C. Lin. Using peer review to teach software testing. In International Computing Education Research Conference, 2012.
10. H. Sffndergaard. Learning from and with peers: The different roles of student peer reviewing. In ACM SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pages 31-35, 2009.
11. K. Topping. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3):249-276, 1998.
12. Y. Wang, H. Li, Y. Sun, J. Yu, and J. Yu. Learning outcomes of programming language courses based on peer code review model. In International Conference on Computer Science & Education, 2011.
13. A. Zeller. Making students read and review code. In ACM SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, 2000.