Education
Evaluating the Quality of Peer-generated Artefacts when Using Web2.0 Computer-supported Collaborative Communities in Large Enrollment Freshman Chemistry Courses
Document Type
Oral Presentation
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Subject Area
Education
Start Date
13-4-2018 10:30 AM
End Date
13-4-2018 11:45 AM
Sponsor
George Bodner (Purdue University West Lafayette), Christopher Randles (Purdue University West Lafayette)
Description
Active learning pedagogies have shown improved academic performance (Cooper et. al., 2015) especially among underprepared/underrepresented students (Freeman et. al., 2014). However, the implementation of active learning pedagogies in large enrollment courses, such as 1st-year science courses, remains difficult. Research has shown that peer-collaborative communities outside the classroom can support active learning. These peer-collaborative communities can provide immediate feedback and improve student learning by helping students construct meaning, introduce disciplinary language (Webb & Palincsar, 1996) and foster the development of disciplinary values and ways of knowing (Brown, 1995). This paper reports on using rubrics to evaluate the ‘quality’ of peer-generated artifacts when using a Web2.0 computer-supported collaborative communities (CSCP) platform called PeerWise. PeerWise was implemented in a large-enrollment (>2000) chemistry lecture course. With this platform, students are required to author, solve and evaluate multiple-choice questions and their solutions. A key feature of Web2.0 systems are participants’ ability to evaluate the quality of the artifacts they create. Here we focus on determining the suitability of previously developed evaluation rubrics for use on large enrollment courses that have previously been used and developed on courses with much lower enrollment (Bottomley & Denny, 2011). This has determined the transferability and scale for which these rubrics can be applied. We will present the results of the evaluation metric and, suggest modifications and suitability of using the rubric so that participants of Web2.0 systems may evaluate repository artifacts in CSCP systems.
Evaluating the Quality of Peer-generated Artefacts when Using Web2.0 Computer-supported Collaborative Communities in Large Enrollment Freshman Chemistry Courses
Indianapolis, IN
Active learning pedagogies have shown improved academic performance (Cooper et. al., 2015) especially among underprepared/underrepresented students (Freeman et. al., 2014). However, the implementation of active learning pedagogies in large enrollment courses, such as 1st-year science courses, remains difficult. Research has shown that peer-collaborative communities outside the classroom can support active learning. These peer-collaborative communities can provide immediate feedback and improve student learning by helping students construct meaning, introduce disciplinary language (Webb & Palincsar, 1996) and foster the development of disciplinary values and ways of knowing (Brown, 1995). This paper reports on using rubrics to evaluate the ‘quality’ of peer-generated artifacts when using a Web2.0 computer-supported collaborative communities (CSCP) platform called PeerWise. PeerWise was implemented in a large-enrollment (>2000) chemistry lecture course. With this platform, students are required to author, solve and evaluate multiple-choice questions and their solutions. A key feature of Web2.0 systems are participants’ ability to evaluate the quality of the artifacts they create. Here we focus on determining the suitability of previously developed evaluation rubrics for use on large enrollment courses that have previously been used and developed on courses with much lower enrollment (Bottomley & Denny, 2011). This has determined the transferability and scale for which these rubrics can be applied. We will present the results of the evaluation metric and, suggest modifications and suitability of using the rubric so that participants of Web2.0 systems may evaluate repository artifacts in CSCP systems.