Reflective Homework as a Learning Tool: Evidence from Comparing Thirteen Years of Dual vs. Single Submission

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.09314v1
• Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 20:04:15 GMT
• Title: Reflective Homework as a Learning Tool: Evidence from Comparing Thirteen Years of Dual vs. Single Submission
• Authors: Madhur Dixit, Kavya Lalbahadur Joshi, Kaveri Bhalchandra Konde, Edward F. Gehringer,
• Abstract summary: This study analyzes 13 years of exam data from a computer architecture course to compare student performance under single versus dual-submission homework conditions.<n>Using pooled t-tests on matched exam questions, we found that dual-submission significantly improved outcomes in a majority of cases.
• Score: 0.6320570871611688
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Dual-submission homework, where students submit work, receive feedback and then revise has gained attention as a way to foster reflection and discourage reliance on online answer repositories. This study analyzes 13 years of exam data from a computer architecture course to compare student performance under single versus dual-submission homework conditions. Using pooled t-tests on matched exam questions, we found that dual-submission significantly improved outcomes in a majority of cases. The results suggest that reflective resubmission can meaningfully enhance learning and may serve as a useful strategy in today's AI-influenced academic environment. This full research paper also discusses pedagogical implications and study limitations.

Related papers

• Demystifying Design Choices of Reinforcement Fine-tuning: A Batched Contextual Bandit Learning Perspective [83.75710105509076]
  This paper aims to shed light on the role of design choices on learning and generalization dynamics.<n>The underlying challenge is that design choices are entangled together, making their contribution to learning and generalization difficult to attribute.<n> Experiments on three base models and two datasets reveal new understanding on the role of various design choices on learning and generalization dynamics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T04:09:06Z)
• Designing AI-Resilient Assessments Using Interconnected Problems: A Theoretically Grounded and Empirically Validated Framework [0.0]
  The rapid adoption of generative AI has undermined traditional modular assessments in computing education.<n>This paper presents a theoretically grounded framework for designing AI-resilient assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-11T15:53:19Z)
• Thinking Forward and Backward: Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning for Retrieval-Augmented Reasoning [137.33138614095435]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has proven to be effective in mitigating hallucinations in large language models.<n>Recent efforts have incorporated search-based interactions into RAG, enabling iterative reasoning with real-time retrieval.<n>We propose Bi-RAR, a novel retrieval-augmented reasoning framework that evaluates each intermediate step jointly in both forward and backward directions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-12T08:29:39Z)
• Existing Large Language Model Unlearning Evaluations Are Inconclusive [105.55899615056573]
  We show that some evaluations introduce substantial new information into the model, potentially masking true unlearning performance.<n>We demonstrate that evaluation outcomes vary significantly across tasks, undermining the generalizability of current evaluation routines.<n>We propose two principles for future unlearning evaluations: minimal information injection and downstream task awareness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-31T19:43:00Z)
• The Potential of Answer Classes in Large-scale Written Computer-Science Exams -- Vol. 2 [0.0]
  In teacher training for secondary education, assessment guidelines are mandatory for every exam.<n>We apply this concept to a university exam with 462 students and 41 tasks.<n>For each task, instructors developed answer classes -- classes of expected responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T10:20:39Z)
• Scalable Two-Minute Feedback: Digital, Lecture-Accompanying Survey as a Continuous Feedback Instrument [0.0]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T08:14:26Z)
• Improving Students With Rubric-Based Self-Assessment and Oral Feedback [2.808134646037882]
  rubrics and oral feedback are approaches to help students improve performance and meet learning outcomes. This paper evaluates the effect of rubrics and oral feedback on student learning outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-24T14:48:28Z)
• 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)
• SS-VAERR: Self-Supervised Apparent Emotional Reaction Recognition from Video [61.21388780334379]
  This work focuses on the apparent emotional reaction recognition from the video-only input, conducted in a self-supervised fashion. The network is first pre-trained on different self-supervised pretext tasks and later fine-tuned on the downstream target task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-20T15:21:51Z)
• Twin Papers: A Simple Framework of Causal Inference for Citations via Coupling [40.60905158071766]
  The main difficulty in investigating the effects is that we need to know counterfactual results, which are not available in reality. The proposed framework regards a pair of papers that cite each other as twins. We investigate twin papers that adopted different decisions, observe the progress of the research impact brought by these studies, and estimate the effect of decisions by the difference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-21T10:42:33Z)
• Benchopt: Reproducible, efficient and collaborative optimization benchmarks [67.29240500171532]
  Benchopt is a framework to automate, reproduce and publish optimization benchmarks in machine learning. Benchopt simplifies benchmarking for the community by providing an off-the-shelf tool for running, sharing and extending experiments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-27T16:19:24Z)
• Sentiment Analysis Based on Deep Learning: A Comparative Study [69.09570726777817]
  The study of public opinion can provide us with valuable information. The efficiency and accuracy of sentiment analysis is being hindered by the challenges encountered in natural language processing. This paper reviews the latest studies that have employed deep learning to solve sentiment analysis problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-05T16:28:10Z)

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.