Description of our experience in a course using AssessMediaWiki, an open-source web application that, connected to a MediaWiki installation, supports for hetero, self and peer to peer assessment procedures, whilst keeps track of compiled assessment data. Thus supervisors can obtain reports to help assessing students.

1. Qualitative assessment of
wiki-based learning processes
Antonio Balderas
Manuel Palomo Duarte
Juan Manuel Dodero
Iván Ruiz Rube

2. Table of contents
● Introduction
● AssessMediaWiki
● Functions
● Case study
● Conclusions and future work
● Acknowledgement

3. Table of contents
● Introduction
● AssessMediaWiki
● Functions
● Case study
● Conclusions and future work
● Acknowledgement

4. Introduction
● Wiki ease collaborative document creation
between peers
● Applied to education, they can support
collaborative learning experiences
● On the same level
● Asynchronous work
● Distributed work

5. Introduction
● They compile a lot of information about each
student's work

6. Introduction
● There are a lot of contributions:
● How to assess the quality of each
contribution?

7. Introduction
● Problem: scalability

8. Introduction
● Students are assigned wiki contributions to be
assessed
● N students → N assessors
● Students learn while they are assessing

9. Table of contents
● Introduction
● AssessMediaWiki
● Functions
● Case study
● Conclusions and future work
● Acknowledgement

10. AssessMediaWiki
● AssessMediaWiki (AMW)

11. AssessMediaWiki

12. AssessMediaWiki
● When a student asks for a contribution to be
assessed:
● AMW orders the more significant
contributions
● AMW selects the 30% of the more
significants in a pool
● One of them is selected by chance
● The more significants contributions have more
possibilites to be assessed

13. Table of contents
● Introduction
● AssessMediaWiki
● Functions
● Case study
● Conclusions and future work
● Acknowledgement

14. Functions
● Two roles: Student and Lecturer

15. Functions
● Student can:
● assess wiki contributions using a rubric
● see the assessment received
● reply an assessment received

16. Functions
● Lecturer can:
● Define the rubric
● Set the category of the articles to be
assessed
● Assess wiki contributions using a rubric
● See assessments received for each student
● Export information to a CSV file
● Referee replies

17. Functions
● From the configuration file you can set:
● The pool size
● The dates period
● Revisions per student

18. Table of contents
● Introduction
● AssessMediaWiki
● Functions
● Case study
● Conclusions and future work
● Acknowledgement

19. Case study
● Used in 2010/11 academic year, on Operating
System Administration on Technical Engineering
in Computer Systems (UCA):
● 38 students
● 145 pages, 1047 editions, 305Kb
● Students had to document a project of a computer
migration
● Three students per group
● They had a task per week

20. Case study
● Assessments:
● Students had to assess technical
competencies in the intermediate editions
● The Lecturer technical competencies that
had to be assessed in the final version
● The grade of the group is an aggregation of that
of its members
● Only are considered competencies in time

21. Case study
● Some remarks:
● 8 of the 11 groups had 0 in the first period
● They didn't think we could consider it
● In the rest of the parts, the 50% of the
groups did the work in time
● Irregular groups: some groups have up
several zeros, while others have almost
none getting a much better grade

22. Table of contents
● Introduction
● AssessMediaWiki
● Functions
● Case study
● Conclusions and future work
● Acknowledgement

23. Conclusions and future work
● Conclusions:
● A wiki eases the collaborative work
● Students can be evaluated from their
contributions
● The assessing of every student can be
hardly made by lecturers
● We solve involving students to use AMW
to assess others students

24. Conclusions and future work
● Future work:
● The assignment of the editions to be
assessed (hetero, self and peer2peer
assessment)
● Meta evaluation
● To ask for the assessment of a non-
significant edition

25. Table of contents
● Introduction
● AssessMediaWiki
● Functions
● Case study
● Conclusions and future work
● Acknowledgements

26. Acknowledgements
● This work has been partly funded funded by Proyectos
de Innovación Docente programme of the University of
Cádiz, "La Heteroevaluación como Apoyo a la
Sostenibilidad en Evaluaciones Complejas de Trabajos
Colaborativos en Wikis" project (PI2_12_029).
● Este trabajo ha sido parcialmente financiado por el
Proyecto de Innovación Docente "La Heteroevaluación
como Apoyo a la Sostenibilidad en Evaluaciones
Complejas de Trabajos Colaborativos en Wikis (Código
PI2_12_029) de la Universidad de Cádiz

27. Thank you for your attention
Any questions?
https://forja.rediris.es/projects/amw
antonio.balderas@uca.es