IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-01146710.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does peer grading work? How to implement and improve it? Comparing instructor and peer assessment in MOOC GdP

Author

Listed:
  • Rémi Bachelet

    (Centrale Lille)

  • Drissa Zongo

    (Centrale Lille)

  • Aline Bourelle

    (Centrale Lille)

Abstract

Large scale peer assessment is arguably the most critical innovation required for development of MOOCs. Its core principle is to involve students in the evaluation and feedback process of correcting assignments. However, it has been criticized for being less rigorous than instructor assessment, too demanding on students and not reliable or fair due to student biases. This paper is drawn from data and practical hands-on experience from MOOC GdP2, in which assignments were both graded by instructors and by peers. Using data from 4650 papers, each graded by 3-5 peers and by an instructor, we test hypotheses and discuss a series of questions: How to train MOOC students to grade their peers? Is peer grading as accurate as instructor grading? What data pre-processing is to be used prior to testing hypotheses on peer grading? Which grading algorithm is best for processing peer-produced data? Is anonymity in peer assessment preferable to increased student interaction? We also present the improved peer grading systems we implemented in MOOC GdP 3 and 4 thanks to this research.

Suggested Citation

  • Rémi Bachelet & Drissa Zongo & Aline Bourelle, 2015. "Does peer grading work? How to implement and improve it? Comparing instructor and peer assessment in MOOC GdP," Post-Print halshs-01146710, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-01146710
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01146710v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01146710v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    peer grading; peer assessment; Massive open online courses; MOOC;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-01146710. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.