WebCoM: a tool to use peer review to improve student interaction
Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC)
Peer evaluation in an algorithms course
Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education
A design for team peer code review
Proceedings of the 36th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
Using peer review as a vehicle for communication skill development and active learning
Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges
Proceedings of the first international workshop on Computing education research
Misunderstandings about object-oriented design: experiences using code reviews
Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
Integrating pedagogical code reviews into a CS 1 course: an empirical study
Proceedings of the 40th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education
Peer review in CS2: conceptual learning
Proceedings of the 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education
Engaging game design students using peer evaluation
Proceedings of the 2011 conference on Information technology education
Expert code review and mastery learning in a software development course
Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Computer science students need experience with essential concepts and professional activities. Peer review is one way to meet these goals. In this work, we examine the students' attitudes towards and engagement in the peer review process, in early, object-oriented, computer science courses. To do this, we used peer review exercises in two CS2 classes at neighboring universities over the course of a semester. Using three groups (one reviewing their peers, one reviewing the instructor, and one completing small design or coding exercises), we measured the students' attitudes, their perceptions of their abilities, and how many of the reviews they completed. We found moderately positive attitudes that generally increased over time but were not significantly different between groups. We also saw a lower completion rate for students reviewing peers than for the other groups. The students' internal motivation, as measured by their need for cognition, was not shown to be strongly related to their attitudes nor to the number of assignments completed. Overall, our results show a strong need for external motivation to help engage students in peer reviews.