Understanding CPR Assignment Results: Peer Reviews and Scores, Study notes of Structural Design and Architecture

The process of reviewing peers' work and calculating scores in a cpr (classroom performance reporting) assignment. It covers the concept of mastery, deviations from average ratings, and the impact of reviewer weights on the final score. The document also illustrates an example of how the average weighted text rating is calculated.

Typology: Study notes

2011/2012

Uploaded on 12/22/2012

bageshri
bageshri 🇮🇳

4.3

(24)

175 documents

1 / 4

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
1
Understanding Your Results
Your results for an assignment will be available after the assignment ends. The report of
your results is divided into three major sections:
Reviews You Performed
Reviews Performed of Your Work
Scores
REVIEWS YOU PERFORMED
Each student must complete a pre-determined number of reviews to finish an assignment.
CPR scores each completed review based on how well each student reviewed their peers
work. Each text entry in a CPR assignment receives an average weighted text rating, which
is based on the ratings assigned by students during the review process. Before an
assignment starts, the instructor decides how closely an individual review must be to this
average rating for the reviewer to achieve mastery of that review.
Consider the following example. Joe Bruin assigns the following ratings during the reviews:
Joe Bruins Reviews Ratings
Review 1 of Student D 9
Review 2 of Student E 8
Review 3 of Student F 6
After the assignment is over, the CPR program calculates Joes deviation from the average
weighted text rating for each review. (See Reviews of Your Work below.) CPR determines
whether or not Joe mastered the reviews by calculating Joes rating deviation from the
average weighted text rating and determining if the deviations are within the range
specified by the instructor. Remember that in this example, the instructor determined the
allowable deviation to be 1.5. Therefore, any deviations greater than 1.5 would not have
been considered mastery of the review. In this case, Joe mastered all the reviews.
Peer Texts Joes Ratings Ave. Ratings Deviations Results
Student D 9 9.45 0.45 Mastered
Student E 8 7.50 0.50 Mastered
Student F 6 5.94 0.06 Mastered
docsity.com
CPR 2012
pf3
pf4

Partial preview of the text

Download Understanding CPR Assignment Results: Peer Reviews and Scores and more Study notes Structural Design and Architecture in PDF only on Docsity!

Understanding Your Results

Your results for an assignment will be available after the assignment ends. The report of your results is divided into three major sections:

 Reviews You Performed  Reviews Performed of Your Work  Scores

REVIEWS YOU PERFORMED

Each student must complete a pre-determined number of reviews to finish an assignment. CPR scores each completed review based on how well each student reviewed their peers’ work. Each text entry in a CPR assignment receives an average weighted text rating, which is based on the ratings assigned by students during the review process. Before an assignment starts, the instructor decides how closely an individual review must be to this average rating for the reviewer to achieve ‘mastery’ of that review.

Consider the following example. Joe Bruin assigns the following ratings during the reviews:

Joe Bruin’s Reviews Ratings

Review 1 of Student D 9 Review 2 of Student E 8 Review 3 of Student F 6

After the assignment is over, the CPR program calculates Joe’s deviation from the average weighted text rating for each review. (See Reviews of Your Work below.) CPR determines whether or not Joe mastered the reviews by calculating Joe’s rating deviation from the average weighted text rating and determining if the deviations are within the range specified by the instructor. Remember that in this example, the instructor determined the allowable deviation to be 1.5. Therefore, any deviations greater than 1.5 would not have been considered mastery of the review. In this case, Joe ‘mastered’ all the reviews.

Peer Texts Joe’s Ratings Ave. Ratings Deviations Results

Student D 9 9.45 0.45 Mastered Student E 8 7.50 0.50 Mastered Student F 6 5.94 0.06 Mastered

REVIEWS PERFORMED OF YOUR WORK

This section displays the reviews done on your own work. CPR displays each question’s text followed by the answers from the reviewers and you. The final column contains your self- assessment answers. The final question displayed is the overall rating of your text by all reviewers:

After the ratings, the screen displays the weight given to each rating. During an assignment, CPR tracks students’ calibration performance and makes a determination as to how well they appear to be as reviewers. From this determination, CPR assigns a weight to each student’s reviewing abilities. This weight is used along with the rating to calculate the average rating for a text.

In this example: Student A, Student B, and Student C all reviewed Joe Bruin’s text. The ratings were as follows:

Student Rating of Joe Bruin’s Text Reviewer Weight

Student A 8 1. Student B 7 1. Student C 8 0. 25

CPR uses the following formula to calculate the average text rating:

Average weighted text rating =

( 8 x 1. 002 )  ( 7 x 1. 002 )  ( 8 x 0. 252 )

  1. 002  1. 002  0. 252 Average weighted text rating = 7.

If you consider only the reviewers whose ratings were fully weighted, Joe’s text would have rating of 7.50. The weak reviewer (reviewer weight = 0.25) had some, but little effect on Joe’s total score. (However, since the review was consistent with the peer reviews for Joe’s text, Student C will see that although a weak reviewer, she received credit personally for a ‘mastered’ peer review.)

calibration is worth 10 points. If Joe had still not mastered Calibration 2 after he had retaken it, then he would not have received any credit for that one calibration. The following table displays Joe’s performance on the calibrations. Remember that the calibrations are worth 30 points total (10 points each): Calibration Results Points

Calibration 1 Mastered 10 Calibration 2 (Retaken) Mastered 10 Calibration 3 Mastered 10

JOE’S REVIEW SCORE

(See Reviews You Performed above for an explanation of the review process.) The following table displays Joe’s performance on the reviews. Remember that the reviews are worth 30 points total (10 points each) and the allowable deviation is 1.5. Review Deviation Results Points

Review 1 0.45 Mastered 10 Review 2 0.50 Mastered 10 Review 3 0.06 Mastered 10

JOE’S SELF-ASSESSMENT SCORE

To receive all the points for the text self-assessment, the rating you assign to your own text must be within the allowable deviation from your average weighted text score. The instructor may decided to allocate partial credit for a somewhat larger deviation The following table displays Joe’s performance on the self-assessment. Remember that the self-assessment is worth 20 points and the allowable deviation is 1.50 for full credit and variable credit if it is with 2.50 of the average weighted text score. Stage Rating Ave. Rating Deviation Results Points

Self-Assessment 8 7.52 0.48 Mastered 20 Since Joe’s rating of his own text deviated less than 1.50 from the average weighted text rating determined from the peer reviews, Joe received full credit for this evaluation. Joe’s Overall Score is 95.03 because he demonstrated high-quality evaluation in the three review stages of the assignment, the sections that the instructor’s point distribution emphasized.

CPR 2012