[Peer Review] Assigning Grades for Peer Reviews

[kdemello]

Part of participating in online coursework involves working with other students to improve drafts and engage in the learning community. When students are assigned peer reviews, let's be honest, they aren't motivated to complete it unless there is a grade attached. I would love the ability to grade peer reviews.

This could be as simple as complete/incomplete, or more complex where the completion of peer reviews was part of a grading rubric for the assignment. But it would be nice if there was something in the grade book, some academic weight given to participating in these reviews, that doesn't involve manually looking up peer reviews outside of the grade book.

[bispojr]

Thanks, 10618071

[vkg]

Adding my support for this feature here -- I've worked with at least one instructor here at Michigan who grades the anonymous peer review itself and who needs an easier way to manage it!

Deactivated user​, is there any chance that improvements for grading peer reviews would be rolled into the Speedgrader 2.0 work currently on the Roadmap? 

[allison]

Hi  @vkg ​,

Thanks for your support. I think it would be great to time the release of Peer Review enhancements with SpeedGrader 2.0. In fact, some of the new workflows would require changes in SpeedGrader 2.0 so it makes sense to wait until we're making larger improvements there to build in support for the "Assignment 2" grading mentioned above.

I don't have any timeline for you on when Peer Review will hit the roadmap. It's a project I'm passionate about but there are other features (i.e. quizzes) that require our attention in the coming months.

[emg15]

Adding my support to having the ability to have a multi-step grade for peer review - initial submission, peer review 1, peer review 2....

Although the process for peer review is more streamline than in Turnitin's PeerMark, the inability to grade the a student's performance of a peer's submission is short-sighted. 

[koop]

Being able to auto-assign peer reviews is great, but creating a second assignment to assess is extremely time consuming. I've been creating the extra assignment for a few years and really wish there was even just a super rudimentary way of assessing the feedback without creating a "no submission" assignment. It could even be just a small box for number input underneath each review that would auto save after you type-in.

I'm guessing that having such a feature would cut my grading time in half for each assignment.

[msimurdi]

I would also love to see this implemented.  Students can learn by assessing others' work.  However, if no grade is attached to their peer review, then it will be all too easy to "check the boxes" during the peer review without critically thinking about the assignment that is to be graded.  I know that this feature is available in Moodle under workshop: Workshop quick guide - MoodleDocs 

[scain]

I think the comments that Allison Weiss shared in her September 2015 post form an incredibly strong foundation for these improvements. The only thing I would add is that it is important to be able to grade the peer reviews while you are looking at the peer reviews in SpeedGrader. I think this is what  @koop  was referring to, but there hasn't been any activity here since March, and no Instructure presence since Allison's last post in December. Hopefully, we can draw some attention back to this valuable, archived idea. stefaniesanders, do you have any insights to provide here? Or could you bring this to someone else's attention who could provide an update?

[koop]

Hi, Steven. Yes, that's exactly what I'm referring to. Thanks for your post. I have switched to using Discussions for assignments that need feedback since it is a bit easier to grade when the replies are threaded. I create a rubric letting students know that their feedback and initial post will be graded all together. Having a direct tool for grading feedback posts would still be far simpler, however. Adding this feature would save me hours upon hours of grading time.

[scain]

That's certainly understandable, given the current state of peer reviews, but there's so much potential there! The capability of in-line feedback on papers being compiled together for the student to review is hugely valuable. Along with the other things mentioned in this post, we should give some attention to the ability of students to see their previous assignment submissions and feedback (another unfortunately archived but excellent idea). This way they could review the feedback left on their first version after submitting their second version.

[barclay_brown]

Thinking like a software architect more than an educator, I wonder if a way to implement this is to have a more generalized "grading assignment" function, that is, an assignment where the assignment is to grade something in the class done by someone else. In creating such an assignment, the teacher would specify:

> What is to be graded, that is, another assignment from the class

> How it is to be graded (scale, rubric, etc.)

> Who is to be graded, options could include:

     a. A randomly selected student from the class (each student is only assigned once)

     b. A randomly selected student from my group (this is used for peer review within a group)

     c. A selected student chosen from the class, that is, manually assigned grading pairs

> Anonymous or not, so grading can be anonymous, if desired

> A "group" version of this kind of assignment would work the same way, except it would be about groups grading other groups. Options might be whether each member of the grading group is polled separately and their grading averaged and comments consolidated, OR the team leader is required to post the team's combined grading for the other team's work.

Barclay