New Orleans, Louisiana
June 26, 2016
June 26, 2016
August 28, 2016
Abstract: Peer-reviewed assignments for learning have been seen as favorably within the literature. The articulated benefits range from students feeling more engaged, having expressed less anxiety, or found to be better equipped to perform in unfamiliar areas outside their current learning environments. However, little research examines the benefits specifically for the feedback provider when a more modern tool, such as the Canvas Learning Management System (LMS) is used. During the fall 2015 semester, a study was conducted to examine the peer review process from the vantage of the feedback reviewer when mitigated by an LMS. Since peer review is seen as a social activity, this study is guided by a social constructivism teaching framework, investigating peer review activities for (a) linear relationships to that of perceived social element inclusion, (b) changes in learning from the perspective of the reviewer rather than the receiver of feedback, and (c) improvement in perceived information literacy. Additionally, this research examines Canvas attributes as identified by Sondergaard & Mulder1 (2012) of (a) Automation, (b) Simplicity, (c) Customizability, and (d) Accessibility, to support statements from the literature that indicate a lack of investigation of more modern peer review tools. Survey results, both qualitative and quantitative, were analyzed across three different peer-reviewed assignments for this examination. Of the 91 respondents representing a 32% response rate, descriptive analysis revealed themes ranging from Changes in Student Efforts to Valued New Perspectives. Whereas, expected Active Learning and Social Benefits slightly contradicted the positive tone found in the thematic review. However, overwhelming positive ratings were collected regarding the use of the Canvas LMS for support in implementing a peer-reviewed assignment. Discussion and implications explore the perceived affect upon the reviewer and how these types of assignments can support the proposed ABET General Criterion 3 Student Outcomes and General Criterion 5 Curriculum currently under revision. Additionally, these results provide a possible evaluation baseline for other faculty and course developers considering the implementation of peer-reviewed activities within first-year program courses.
Kappers, W. M. (2016, June), Through the Lens of the Reviewer: Information Literacy, an LMS, and Peer Review Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.27040
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2016 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015