The role of community feedback in the student example authoring process

An evaluation of AnnotEx

Ihan Hsiao, Peter Brusilovsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper explores a new approach to engage students in authoring educational content. This approach was implemented in AnnotEx (Example Annotator) system, which allows students to annotate computer programming examples with line-by-line explanations and review annotations produced by ther peers. A controlled study of AnnotEx presented in this paper evaluated the impact of the community peer-reviewing process on the quality of produced annotations and student learning. The study confirmed that community feedback increases the volume and the quality of produced annotations and positively affects the work of weaker students. The peer-rating process enabled the community to distinguish good and bad annotations. Peer comments provided efficient guidelines for improving annotations and caused a significant increase in quality.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)482-499
Number of pages18
JournalBritish Journal of Educational Technology
Volume42
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

evaluation
community
student
educational content
programming
rating
learning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Cite this

The role of community feedback in the student example authoring process : An evaluation of AnnotEx. / Hsiao, Ihan; Brusilovsky, Peter.

In: British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 42, No. 3, 05.2011, p. 482-499.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{85d2909b8030420fb56d29116a422866,
title = "The role of community feedback in the student example authoring process: An evaluation of AnnotEx",
abstract = "This paper explores a new approach to engage students in authoring educational content. This approach was implemented in AnnotEx (Example Annotator) system, which allows students to annotate computer programming examples with line-by-line explanations and review annotations produced by ther peers. A controlled study of AnnotEx presented in this paper evaluated the impact of the community peer-reviewing process on the quality of produced annotations and student learning. The study confirmed that community feedback increases the volume and the quality of produced annotations and positively affects the work of weaker students. The peer-rating process enabled the community to distinguish good and bad annotations. Peer comments provided efficient guidelines for improving annotations and caused a significant increase in quality.",
author = "Ihan Hsiao and Peter Brusilovsky",
year = "2011",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01030.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "482--499",
journal = "British Journal of Educational Technology",
issn = "0007-1013",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The role of community feedback in the student example authoring process

T2 - An evaluation of AnnotEx

AU - Hsiao, Ihan

AU - Brusilovsky, Peter

PY - 2011/5

Y1 - 2011/5

N2 - This paper explores a new approach to engage students in authoring educational content. This approach was implemented in AnnotEx (Example Annotator) system, which allows students to annotate computer programming examples with line-by-line explanations and review annotations produced by ther peers. A controlled study of AnnotEx presented in this paper evaluated the impact of the community peer-reviewing process on the quality of produced annotations and student learning. The study confirmed that community feedback increases the volume and the quality of produced annotations and positively affects the work of weaker students. The peer-rating process enabled the community to distinguish good and bad annotations. Peer comments provided efficient guidelines for improving annotations and caused a significant increase in quality.

AB - This paper explores a new approach to engage students in authoring educational content. This approach was implemented in AnnotEx (Example Annotator) system, which allows students to annotate computer programming examples with line-by-line explanations and review annotations produced by ther peers. A controlled study of AnnotEx presented in this paper evaluated the impact of the community peer-reviewing process on the quality of produced annotations and student learning. The study confirmed that community feedback increases the volume and the quality of produced annotations and positively affects the work of weaker students. The peer-rating process enabled the community to distinguish good and bad annotations. Peer comments provided efficient guidelines for improving annotations and caused a significant increase in quality.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953781235&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79953781235&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01030.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01030.x

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 482

EP - 499

JO - British Journal of Educational Technology

JF - British Journal of Educational Technology

SN - 0007-1013

IS - 3

ER -