Improving essay peer grading accuracy in MOOCs using personalized weights from student's engagement and performance
Carlos Garc\'ia-Mart\'inez, Rebeca Cerezo, Manuel Berm\'udez,, Crist\'obal Romero

TL;DR
This study explores how personalized weights based on student engagement and performance can improve the accuracy of peer grading in MOOCs, especially when using median aggregation, demonstrated through analysis of a philosophy course.
Contribution
It introduces a method to compute personalized weights from engagement and performance data to enhance peer grading accuracy without complex calibration.
Findings
Weighted median aggregation improves score validity.
Performance-based weights increase correlation with instructor grades.
Analysis conducted on data from a philosophy MOOC.
Abstract
Most MOOC platforms either use simple schemes for aggregating peer grades, e.g., taking the mean or the median, or apply methodologies that increase students' workload considerably, such as calibrated peer review. To reduce the error between the instructor and students' aggregated scores in the simple schemes, without requiring demanding grading calibration phases, some proposals compute specific weights to compute a weighted aggregation of the peer grades. In this work, and in contrast to most previous studies, we analyse the use of students' engagement and performance measures to compute personalized weights and study the validity of the aggregated scores produced by these common functions, mean and median, together with two other from the information retrieval field, namely the geometric and harmonic means. To test this procedure we have analysed data from a MOOC about Philosophy.…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
