评估(太)大的CS班和(太)少的资源中的小组工作:一个经验报告

Joël Porquet-Lupine, Madison Brigham
{"title":"评估(太)大的CS班和(太)少的资源中的小组工作:一个经验报告","authors":"Joël Porquet-Lupine, Madison Brigham","doi":"10.1145/3545945.3569788","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Group work is an excellent way to provide students with more complex, engaging class projects and help them practice many of the professional skills necessary for industry, where large-scale projects have long been the norm. However, as instructors of large CS classes are typically unable to determine individual contributions based on project submissions alone, group work can often cause some frustration when partners of the same group don't put in the same amount of effort yet receive the same score. In this paper, we describe a bimodal assessment strategy for group work, which couples end-of-term staff-led oral interviews with per-project student-reported self and peer evaluations. The combination of these approaches ensures a thorough and fair evaluation of students' contributions to their groups, and scales up to large classes with limited instructional staff. The feedback from students is very positive, both in terms of agreeing with the narratives justifying this assessment strategy and finding it to be an effective solution to fairly grading group work.","PeriodicalId":371326,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Group Work in (too) Large CS Classes with (too) Few Resources: An Experience Report\",\"authors\":\"Joël Porquet-Lupine, Madison Brigham\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3545945.3569788\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Group work is an excellent way to provide students with more complex, engaging class projects and help them practice many of the professional skills necessary for industry, where large-scale projects have long been the norm. However, as instructors of large CS classes are typically unable to determine individual contributions based on project submissions alone, group work can often cause some frustration when partners of the same group don't put in the same amount of effort yet receive the same score. In this paper, we describe a bimodal assessment strategy for group work, which couples end-of-term staff-led oral interviews with per-project student-reported self and peer evaluations. The combination of these approaches ensures a thorough and fair evaluation of students' contributions to their groups, and scales up to large classes with limited instructional staff. The feedback from students is very positive, both in terms of agreeing with the narratives justifying this assessment strategy and finding it to be an effective solution to fairly grading group work.\",\"PeriodicalId\":371326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3545945.3569788\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 54th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3545945.3569788","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

小组作业是一种很好的方式,可以为学生提供更复杂、更有吸引力的课堂项目,并帮助他们练习许多工业所需的专业技能,而大型项目长期以来一直是常态。然而,由于大型CS课程的讲师通常无法仅根据项目提交来确定个人的贡献,当同一组的合作伙伴没有投入相同的努力却得到相同的分数时,小组工作通常会导致一些挫折。在本文中,我们描述了一种用于小组工作的双峰评估策略,该策略将学期末教师领导的口头访谈与每个项目的学生报告的自我评估和同伴评估结合起来。这些方法的结合确保了对学生对其小组的贡献进行全面和公平的评估,并扩大到教学人员有限的大班。学生们的反馈是非常积极的,既同意这种评估策略的叙述,也发现它是公平评分小组作业的有效解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating Group Work in (too) Large CS Classes with (too) Few Resources: An Experience Report
Group work is an excellent way to provide students with more complex, engaging class projects and help them practice many of the professional skills necessary for industry, where large-scale projects have long been the norm. However, as instructors of large CS classes are typically unable to determine individual contributions based on project submissions alone, group work can often cause some frustration when partners of the same group don't put in the same amount of effort yet receive the same score. In this paper, we describe a bimodal assessment strategy for group work, which couples end-of-term staff-led oral interviews with per-project student-reported self and peer evaluations. The combination of these approaches ensures a thorough and fair evaluation of students' contributions to their groups, and scales up to large classes with limited instructional staff. The feedback from students is very positive, both in terms of agreeing with the narratives justifying this assessment strategy and finding it to be an effective solution to fairly grading group work.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信