PeerWise Nottingham seminar

538 views
458 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
538
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Can follow the author
  • Institutions: 77Courses:557Students:33757Questions:94207Answers:2308854
  • Scaffolding provided in terms of how to come up with material for good questions. The above handout (a blank version was also provided) encourages students to choose topics within their Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky), identify misconceptions or things they don’t understand and devise questions with a realistic context. Students got around 45 mins for this activity
  • We provided screencasts online to cover details of signing up, logging in, creating questions, finding questions to answer These are now hosted on the PW site. Creating most popular, viewed 170 times (not necessarily all from the 1A course) Assessment set due 9 days later
  • We provided screencasts online to cover details of signing up, logging in, creating questions, finding questions to answer These are now hosted on the PW site. Creating most popular, viewed 170 times (not necessarily all from the 1A course) Assessment set due 9 days later
  • Uptake for assessment done in course
  • Ross – placeholder for now, to be updated with accurate graphs after 14 th Dec exam
  • This is typical of questions submitted by the highest performing students Focussed on quantitative problemsolving * Amusing context * Great care and attention with diags and maths The 4 images show question solutions sketch Solution maths Comment and author’s response.
  • Aside from this being a very creative question, with a great diagram, and a good spread of answers it is also a nice example of peer-tutoring The author wrote the question and got the calculation wrong in the first version of the question This was picked up on, and corrected by, another student the same evening, and the version of the question replaced with the peer’s correct explanation We also placed one of the student generated questions on the exam (not this one).
  • This was picked up on, and corrected by, another student the same evening, and the version of the question replaced with the peer’s correct explanation
  • Some positives
  • Ross – I have just pasted in sample positive and negative comments here from the survey, feel free to summarise or change if you think more appropriate.
  • PeerWise Nottingham seminar

    1. 1. Using PeerWise to support a community of learning Ross Galloway, Simon Bates, Karon McBride
    2. 2. <ul><li>Web-based MCQ repository built by students </li></ul><ul><li>Students: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>develop new questions with associated explanations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>answer existing questions and rate them for quality and difficulty </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>take part in discussions </li></ul></ul>
    3. 3.
    4. 4.
    5. 5.
    6. 6.
    7. 7.
    8. 8.
    9. 9.
    10. 10. <ul><li>To date </li></ul><ul><ul><li>77 institutions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>557 courses </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>33757 students have contributed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>94207 questions have been written </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2308854 answers have been submitted </li></ul></ul>
    11. 11. <ul><li>What we did in our course </li></ul>
    12. 12. <ul><li>PeerWise was introduced in workshop sessions in Week 5 </li></ul><ul><li>Students worked through </li></ul><ul><li>structured example task </li></ul><ul><li>and devised own Qs </li></ul><ul><li>in groups. </li></ul>
    13. 13.
    14. 14. <ul><li>An assessment was set for the end of </li></ul><ul><li>Week 6: </li></ul><ul><li>Minimum requirements: </li></ul><ul><li>Write 1 question </li></ul><ul><li>Answer 5 </li></ul><ul><li>Comment on & rate 3 </li></ul><ul><li>Contributed ~3% to course assessment </li></ul>
    15. 15. <ul><li>We were deliberately </li></ul><ul><li>hands off. </li></ul><ul><li>No moderation </li></ul><ul><li>No corrections </li></ul><ul><li>No interventions at all </li></ul><ul><li>But we did observe….. </li></ul>
    16. 16. Assessment mark based on performance as determined by PeerWise score.
    17. 17. <ul><li>What we found </li></ul><ul><ul><li>engagement, examples, effects </li></ul></ul>
    18. 18. It’s just a gimmick…..
    19. 19. <ul><li>Uptake for in- </li></ul><ul><li>course assessment </li></ul><ul><li>(class size of </li></ul><ul><li>~200) </li></ul><ul><li>350 questions </li></ul><ul><li>in total </li></ul><ul><li>~3500 answers </li></ul><ul><li>~2000 comments </li></ul>Workshop training Live Due
    20. 20. They’ll put in nonsense & irrelevant questions….
    21. 21.
    22. 22. <ul><li>Quality of submissions: </li></ul><ul><li>Average quality was very good </li></ul><ul><li>Few trivial questions / nonsense distracters </li></ul><ul><li>Highest quality questions were EXCEPTIONALLY good </li></ul>
    23. 23. The questions will be poor quality… rote learning, factual recall blah blah blah…..
    24. 24.
    25. 26. The science will be all wrong……
    26. 27.
    27. 28. <ul><li>Perceptions </li></ul><ul><li>We sought student feedback both in ‘wash-up’ sessions after the assessment and in the end of course questionnaire </li></ul>
    28. 29. <ul><li>Positives </li></ul>
    29. 30. <ul><li>Positives </li></ul>
    30. 31. <ul><li>Negatives </li></ul>
    31. 32. … but they’ll lose interest after a while….
    32. 33. Mid-semester deadline
    33. 34. End-of-semester deadline
    34. 35. … but you can’t prove that greater use correlates with performance….
    35. 37. CA1 CA3 CA5
    36. 38. <ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>bit.ly/EdPER </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Take-homes: </li></ul><ul><li>Provide orientation task </li></ul><ul><li>Set the quality bar very high </li></ul><ul><li>Force yourself to be hands-off </li></ul><ul><li>Set an assessment task </li></ul><ul><li>Leave the deadline as late as you can </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment is quality-based but light-load (no direct marking required) </li></ul><ul><li>Unleash the creativity of your students! </li></ul>
    37. 39. Marking system: PeerWise score assignment mark highest score highest score lowest score minimum task requirement 40% 70% 100%

    ×