Scalable Two-Minute Feedback: Digital, Lecture-Accompanying Survey as a Continuous Feedback Instrument

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.19334v2
• Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 09:03:10 GMT
• Title: Scalable Two-Minute Feedback: Digital, Lecture-Accompanying Survey as a Continuous Feedback Instrument
• Authors: Armin Egetenmeier, Sven Strickroth,
• Abstract summary: Detailed feedback on courses and lecture content is essential for their improvement and also serves as a tool for reflection. The article used a digital survey format as formative feedback which attempts to measure student stress in a quantitative part and to address the participants' reflection in a qualitative part. The results show a low, but constant rate of feedback. Responses mostly cover topics of the lecture content or organizational aspects and were intensively used to report issues within the lecture.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Detailed feedback on courses and lecture content is essential for their improvement and also serves as a tool for reflection. However, feedback methods are often only used sporadically, especially in mass courses, because collecting and analyzing feedback in a timely manner is often a challenge for teachers. Moreover, the current situation of the students or the changing workload during the semester are usually not taken into account either. For a holistic investigation, the article used a digital survey format as formative feedback which attempts to measure student stress in a quantitative part and to address the participants' reflection in a qualitative part, as well as to collect general suggestions for improvement (based on the so-called One-Minute Paper) at two educational institutions. The feedback during the semester is evaluated qualitatively and discussed on a meta-level and special features (e.g. reflections on student work ethic or other courses) are addressed. The results show a low, but constant rate of feedback. Responses mostly cover topics of the lecture content or organizational aspects and were intensively used to report issues within the lecture. In addition, artificial intelligence (AI) support in the form of a large language model was tested and showed promising results in summarizing the open-ended responses for the teacher. Finally, the experiences from the lecturers are reflected upon and the results as well as possibilities for improvement are discussed.

Related papers

• A Literature Review of Literature Reviews in Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence [58.6354685593418]
  This paper proposes several article-level, field-normalized, and large language model-empowered bibliometric indicators to evaluate reviews. The newly emerging AI-generated literature reviews are also appraised. This work offers insights into the current challenges of literature reviews and envisions future directions for their development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:28:50Z)
• Evaluation of ChatGPT Feedback on ELL Writers' Coherence and Cohesion [0.7028778922533686]
  ChatGPT has had a transformative effect on education where students are using it to help with homework assignments and teachers are actively employing it in their teaching practices. This study evaluated the quality of the feedback generated by ChatGPT regarding the coherence and cohesion of the essays written by English Language learners (ELLs) students.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T10:25:56Z)
• Constructive Large Language Models Alignment with Diverse Feedback [76.9578950893839]
  We introduce Constructive and Diverse Feedback (CDF) as a novel method to enhance large language models alignment. We exploit critique feedback for easy problems, refinement feedback for medium problems, and preference feedback for hard problems. By training our model with this diversified feedback, we achieve enhanced alignment performance while using less training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T09:20:14Z)
• PapagAI:Automated Feedback for Reflective Essays [48.4434976446053]
  We present the first open-source automated feedback tool based on didactic theory and implemented as a hybrid AI system. The main objective of our work is to enable better learning outcomes for students and to complement the teaching activities of lecturers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-10T11:05:51Z)
• Using Large Language Models to Provide Explanatory Feedback to Human Tutors [3.2507682694499582]
  We present two approaches for supplying tutors real-time feedback within an online lesson on how to give students effective praise. This work-in-progress demonstrates considerable accuracy in binary classification for corrective feedback of effective, or effort-based. More notably, we introduce progress towards an enhanced approach of providing explanatory feedback using large language model-facilitated named entity recognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-27T14:19:12Z)
• Impact of combining human and analytics feedback on students' engagement with, and performance in, reflective writing tasks [3.4843936798388015]
  This study proposes a personalised behavioural feedback intervention based on students' writing engagement analytics. In a semester-long experimental study involving 81 postgraduate students, its impact on learning engagement and performance was studied.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-15T15:41:26Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
• Learning Opinion Summarizers by Selecting Informative Reviews [81.47506952645564]
  We collect a large dataset of summaries paired with user reviews for over 31,000 products, enabling supervised training. The content of many reviews is not reflected in the human-written summaries, and, thus, the summarizer trained on random review subsets hallucinates. We formulate the task as jointly learning to select informative subsets of reviews and summarizing the opinions expressed in these subsets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-09T15:01:43Z)
• A literature survey on student feedback assessment tools and their usage in sentiment analysis [0.0]
  We evaluate the effectiveness of various in-class feedback assessment methods such as Kahoot!, Mentimeter, Padlet, and polling. We propose a sentiment analysis model for extracting the explicit suggestions from the students' qualitative feedback comments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-09T06:56:30Z)
• ProtoTransformer: A Meta-Learning Approach to Providing Student Feedback [54.142719510638614]
  In this paper, we frame the problem of providing feedback as few-shot classification. A meta-learner adapts to give feedback to student code on a new programming question from just a few examples by instructors. Our approach was successfully deployed to deliver feedback to 16,000 student exam-solutions in a programming course offered by a tier 1 university.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-23T22:41:28Z)
• Leveraging Peer Feedback to Improve Visualization Education [4.679788938455095]
  We discuss the construction and application of peer review in a computer science visualization course. We evaluate student projects, peer review text, and a post-course questionnaire from 3 semesters of mixed undergraduate and graduate courses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-12T21:46:58Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.