Peer assessment in MOOCs: The relationship between peer reviewers' ability and authors' essay performance

被引:41
作者
Huisman, Bart [1 ]
Admiraal, Wilfried [2 ]
Pilli, Olga [3 ]
van de Ven, Maarten [4 ]
Saab, Nadira [1 ]
机构
[1] Leiden Univ, Grad Sch Teaching ICLON, Wassenaarseweg 62A,POB 905, NL-2300 AX Leiden, Netherlands
[2] Leiden Univ, Grad Sch Teaching ICLON, Educ Sci, Leiden, Netherlands
[3] Girne Amer Univ, Fac Educ, Via Mersin 10, Kyrenia, North Cyprus, Turkey
[4] Leiden Univ, Grad Sch Teaching ICLON, Higher Educ Dept, Leiden, Netherlands
关键词
CHALLENGES;
D O I
10.1111/bjet.12520
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
In a relatively short period of time, massive open online courses (MOOCs) have become a considerable topic of research and debate, and the number of available MOOCs is rapidly growing. Along with issues of formal recognition and accreditation, this growth in the number of MOOCs being developed increases the relevance of assessment quality. Within the context of a typical xMOOC, the current study focuses on peer assessment of essay assignments. In the literature, two contradicting theoretical arguments can be found: that learners should be matched with same-ability peers (homogeneously) versus that students should be matched with different-ability peers (heterogeneously). Considering these arguments, the relationship between peer reviewers' ability and authors' essay performance is explored. Results indicate that peer reviewers' ability is positively related to authors' essay performance. Moreover, this relationship is only established for intermediate and high ability authors; essay performance of lower ability authors appeared not to be related to the ability of their reviewing peers. Results are discussed in relation to the matching of learners and instructional design of peer assessment in MOOCs.
引用
收藏
页码:101 / 110
页数:10
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
Admiraal W., 2014, INT J HIGHER ED, V3, P119, DOI [DOI 10.5430/IJHE.V3N3P119, 10.5430/ijhe.v3n3p119]
[2]  
Admiraal W, 2015, ELECTRON J E-LEARN, V13, P207
[3]  
CHAUHAN A, 2014, DIGITAL ED REV, V25, P7
[4]   Commenting on writing - Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts [J].
Cho, K ;
Schunn, CD ;
Charney, D .
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION, 2006, 23 (03) :260-294
[5]   Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system [J].
Cho, Kwangsu ;
Schunn, Christian D. .
COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2007, 48 (03) :409-426
[6]   Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives [J].
Cho, Kwangsu ;
Schunn, Christian D. ;
Wilson, Roy W. .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 98 (04) :891-901
[7]   Student revision with peer and expert reviewing [J].
Cho, Kwangsu ;
MacArthur, Charles .
LEARNING AND INSTRUCTION, 2010, 20 (04) :328-338
[8]  
Cohen J., 1988, STAT POWER ANAL BEHA, DOI [10.4324/9780203771587, DOI 10.4324/9780203771587]
[9]   Changing "Course": Reconceptualizing Educational Variables for Massive Open Online Courses [J].
DeBoer, Jennifer ;
Ho, Andrew D. ;
Stump, Glenda S. ;
Breslow, Lori .
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER, 2014, 43 (02) :74-84
[10]  
Downes S., 2008, INNOVATE J ONLINE ED, V5, P6