MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Testing the Validity of the Post and Vote Model of Web-Based Peer Assessment

2006· book-chapter· en· W2489507737 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce L. Mann

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStudent Assessment and Feedback
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeer assessmentPearson product-moment correlation coefficientPsychologyProduct (mathematics)Correlation coefficientPeer evaluationComputer scienceMathematics educationStatisticsMathematicsHigher educationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two tests of validity were conducted with undergraduate education students on a method of online peer assessment called post and vote. Validity was determined by calculating a Pearson product-moment correlation and corresponding coefficient of determination that compared the average grade assigned by the pre-service teachers with the grade assigned independently by the course instructor. Results of both studies showed that post and vote Web-based peer assessment was valid with these groups, and generalizable to undergraduate classes engaged in similar tasks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.172
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.172
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainEvaluation
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicStudent Assessment and FeedbackFrench-language works237,207