Expert Evaluation of 300 Projects per Day

David A. Joyner
{"title":"Expert Evaluation of 300 Projects per Day","authors":"David A. Joyner","doi":"10.1145/2876034.2893384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In October 2014, one-time MOOC developer Udacity completed its transition from primarily producing massive, open online courses to producing job-focused, project-based microcredentials called \"Nanodegree\" programs. With this transition came a challenge: whereas MOOCs focus on automated assessment and peer-to-peer grading, project-based microcredentials would only be feasible with expert evaluation. With dreams of enrolling tens of thousands of students at a time, the major obstacle became project evaluation. To address this, Udacity developed a system for hiring external experts as project reviewers. A year later, this system has supported project evaluation on a massive scale: 61,000 projects have been evaluated in 12 months, with 50% evaluated within 2.5 hours (and 88% within 24 hours) of submission. More importantly, students rate the feedback they receive very highly at 4.8/5.0. In this paper, we discuss the structure of the project review system, including the nature of the projects, the structure of the feedback, and the data described above.","PeriodicalId":20739,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2876034.2893384","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In October 2014, one-time MOOC developer Udacity completed its transition from primarily producing massive, open online courses to producing job-focused, project-based microcredentials called "Nanodegree" programs. With this transition came a challenge: whereas MOOCs focus on automated assessment and peer-to-peer grading, project-based microcredentials would only be feasible with expert evaluation. With dreams of enrolling tens of thousands of students at a time, the major obstacle became project evaluation. To address this, Udacity developed a system for hiring external experts as project reviewers. A year later, this system has supported project evaluation on a massive scale: 61,000 projects have been evaluated in 12 months, with 50% evaluated within 2.5 hours (and 88% within 24 hours) of submission. More importantly, students rate the feedback they receive very highly at 4.8/5.0. In this paper, we discuss the structure of the project review system, including the nature of the projects, the structure of the feedback, and the data described above.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
每天300个项目的专家评估
2014年10月,曾经的MOOC开发商Udacity完成了转型,从主要生产大规模开放式在线课程,转向生产以就业为重点、基于项目的“纳米学位”(Nanodegree)微证书课程。这种转变带来了挑战:mooc侧重于自动评估和点对点评分,而基于项目的微证书只有在专家评估的情况下才可行。怀着一次招收数万名学生的梦想,主要的障碍变成了项目评估。为了解决这个问题,Udacity开发了一个聘请外部专家作为项目评审者的系统。一年后,该系统支持了大规模的项目评估:在12个月内完成了61,000个项目的评估,其中50%在提交后2.5小时内完成评估(88%在24小时内完成评估)。更重要的是,学生们对他们收到的反馈给出了4.8/5.0的高分。在本文中,我们讨论了项目评审系统的结构,包括项目的性质、反馈的结构和上述数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Online Urbanism: Interest-based Subcultures as Drivers of Informal Learning in an Online Community Course Builder Skill Maps A Preliminary Look at MOOC-associated Facebook Groups: Prevalence, Geographic Representation, and Homophily Profiling MOOC Course Returners: How Does Student Behavior Change Between Two Course Enrollments? AXIS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1