peer graded assignment submit your work and review your peers

Instruct­ional Resources

Resources for instructors to use when planning, creating, teaching, and assessing

• High Stakes and Low Stakes Assessment
• Promoting Integrity through Assessment Design
• Open Book Assessments
• Assessment Strategies: Considerations for Remote Instruction
• End-of-Course Assessment Options
• Bulletproofing Online Assessments
• Considerations for Constructing an Exam
• Question Types in Brightspace
• Addressing Informal Accommodation Requests
• Making Feedback Learner-Centered
• Providing Feedback Electronically
• Types of Feedback
• Feedback Technologies
• Soliciting Feedback from Students on Their Learning Experience (Alternatives to CEQs)
• Types of Rubrics
• Steps for Creating a Rubric
• Resources to help create or use rubrics

Creating a Peer Review Assignment

From abstract to concrete: creating a peer review assignment.

If your course analysis and planning revealed the need for an assignment that includes peer review, now it is time to design that assignment. This resource will guide you in creating the peer review components of an assignment. It includes guidance for describing the assignment, clarifying expectations related to peer review, and how to provide feedback. Examples from a course that used peer review are included.

Any assignment design should include:

• A clear description of the assignment
• Learning outcomes
• Evaluation breakdown and criteria
• An outline of what is expected of students
• A rubric or questions and criteria to consider when reviewing a peer’s work
• Procedural or technical information needed to complete the assignment

The example content on this page under the Show/Hide links is from a first year Folklore course.

Information That Goes in the Course Syllabus

Below are items to consider including in your course syllabus. This information may be dispersed among pages such as the “Course Evaluation” page and the “Course Format and Expectations” page.

Short Essays

There are three (3) short essays that will go through the peer review process—each essay will be worth 20%.

Part of your grade will be based on your work within the peer review process. Learning to offer great peer feedback is a skill that requires practice, and can be very rewarding for all involved. Learning to receive peer feedback and use it effectively can help you improve your work in this course and future courses. To get the most out of this peer review process, you need to make each draft a complete, full-length essay with a controlling idea, organization, and conclusion.

For each short essay you will:

• Submit a draft, by the due date, for your peers to review (1%)
• Review the work of two of your peers and provide feedback that they can use to improve their essay (2%)
• Reflect on your peers’ feedback of your work and revise your draft using feedback from your peers and your own reflections (1%)
• Revise your draft using feedback from your peers and your own reflections and submit a final version of your essay for your instructor (16%)

How to Provide Feedback

Think about how to share written feedback in a constructive way. Read the papers of each of your group members and provide feedback that they can use to improve their paper. An effective peer review includes the following:

• general comments about the paper;
• specific descriptions of what you liked / didn’t like or what was effective / ineffective; and
• specific advice about what can be improved.

The following statements stems will help you respond to your peers:

• “I’d like to hear more about…”
• “This is what I find interesting…”

And, as always, think about the questions:

• “What surprised me?”
• “What intrigued me?”
• “What disturbed me?”

Additional Tips

• Don’t withhold constructive feedback about areas of improvement.
• Pay attention to the language used – positive and constructive versus judgemental.
• Focus on the strengths and weakness of the individual’s work, not the individual themselves or their personality.
• Be specific.
• If possible, begin and end with positive comments, include areas for improvement in the middle.
• Be realistic — are the suggested changes doable within the content of the assignment?
• Present your own thoughts on your peer’s work versus stating your suggested changes as facts.

When providing feedback via comments, be sure that it has the right level of detail and that it is clear and states your objective opinion. If feedback is excessively brief or vague, excessively detailed, or subjective rather than objective, it becomes about personal taste and preference and may be confusing, off-putting or difficult to use.

Peer Review Using peerScholar

When your assignment draft is complete you will use peerScholar to complete the peer review process.

Peer review has three phases in peerScholar:

• Create — submit your work for your peers to review
• Assess — review your peer’s assignment and provide feedback to your to them
• review feedback that your peers provided to you
• carefully consider how you would like to incorporate the feedback
• revise your essay and resubmit it for your instructor

Submit your assignment via peerScholar by the due date provided in the course schedule. Your assignment will be available to your peers for review when the Create phase is closed and the Assess phase begins.

Submission Steps:

• On the page “Short Essay: Peer Review Phase 1” click the link “peerScholar”.
• Once peerScholar opens, select the “Create” link.
• Copy and paste your essay into the compose window, or attach a file.
• Save your work.
• Select “Preview” to see what your saved essay will look like when you submit it.

Now it is time to review essays from two of your peers and provide feedback to them. Your peers will do the same for you! Feedback will be available when the Assess phase is closed and the Reflect phase begins.

Steps to provide feedback to your peers:

• On the page “Short Essay: Peer Review Phase 2” click the link “peerScholar”.
• Once peerScholar opens, select the “Assess” link.
• Carefully read the work of each or your peers and provide them with feedback using the inline comments tool and by answering the questions provided.

Review the feedback you received from your peers on your work and think critically about it to decide how you want to incorporate their feedback. Then, revise your essay and resubmit for your instructor.

Steps to reflect on your peers’ feedback and to resubmit your essay:

• Once peerScholar opens, select the “Reflect” link.
• Carefully read the feedback that each peer provided. Decide on how you want to incorporate the feedback.
• Toggle to the Revision screen to see you a copy of your original composition. Revise your essay and resubmit it to peerScholar for your instructor to grade. You may also upload a revised document.

Where possible, include a rubric in a peer review assignment. The rubric will benefit instructors when they configure the assignment and create assessments to use during the peer review, it will benefit students when they complete the assignment, and it will benefit all of those involved in evaluating and providing feedback.

Educational Benefits of Using a Rubric

• Students can score their peer’s work using the rubric
• A rubric can act as a guide in a student’s exploration of their peer’s work
• Using a rubric encourages a discovery mind set
• Students can identify examples of what good work looks like and what poor work looks like
• If you average five or more peer-assessments that took place based on a rubric, the average score tends to be a very good estimate of the student’s skill

Making the Rubric Available to Students

Make sure a copy of the rubric is available in Brightspace and peerScholar:

• Attach a rubric as part of the assignment details in the course syllabus
• In the Create phase of peerScholar, attach a rubric and refer to the attached rubric in the instructions

Information That Goes in a Module

You can add specific information about an assignment, phase, or deliverable directly in your module or weekly content. Information can include:

• Descriptions and details about a specific topic or deliverable
• Required readings and resources
• Value for the deliverable
• Link to launch the application, if applicable

Note: The title of the short essay has been changed and links are inactive.

Week 3: Overview

Short essay: “title tbd” (20%).

If you haven’t started already, it’s time to start your Short Essay: “Title TBD”.

Instructions

Read the story “Title TBD”, and watch the two videos of the stories being told. After carefully reading the tale, and watching the videos, please consider the following questions:

• What “life lessons” are emphasized in the tale?
• How might these tales reflect the values and beliefs of members of Newfoundland outport communities in the first half of the 20th century?
• What “real world” lessons are highlighted through this tale?
• Have you heard/seen/read alternate versions of this tale?
• What does each version of the story emphasize? (Compare and contrast)

When your draft version of your essay is complete, submit it via peerScholar for your peers to review.

See the course evaluation page for general information about Short Essays and about peer review. See the course schedule for dues dates.

You're signed out

Sign in to ask questions, follow content, and engage with the Community

• Canvas Instructor
• Instructor Guide

How do I use peer review assignments in a course?

• Subscribe to RSS Feed
• Printer Friendly Page
• Report Inappropriate Content

in Instructor Guide

Note: You can only embed guides in Canvas courses. Embedding on other sites is not supported.

Community Help

View our top guides and resources:.

To participate in the Instructurer Community, you need to sign up or log in:

Peer-graded Assignment: Submit Your Work and Review Your Peers

Peer-graded assignment: submit your work and review your peers >> databases and sql for data science with python.

You have been hired by an organization that strives to improve educational outcomes for children and young people in Chicago. Your job is to analyze the census, crime, and school data for a given neighborhood or district. You will identify causes that impact the enrollment, safety, health, environment ratings of schools. You will be required to answer questions similar to what a real life data analyst or data scientist would be tasked with. You will be assessed both on the correctness of your SQL queries and results.

A Jupyter notebook is provided to help you complete this assignment. Follow the instructions to complete all the problems, then share the Queries and Results with your peers for review.

Example Submissions

Here is an example of a submission clearly showing both the SQL Query and its Results/output, when executed from a Jupyter notebook.

Important aspects of the submission are highlighted below for illustrative purposes:

Assignment Solution :

Problem 1: find the total number of crimes recorded in the crime table.

Problem 2: Retrieve first 10 rows from the CRIME table

Problem 3: How many crimes involve an arrest?

Problem 4: Which unique types of crimes have been recorded at GAS STATION locations?

Problem 5: In the CENUS_DATA table list all Community Areas whose names start with the letter ‘B’.

Problem 6: Which schools in Community Areas 10 to 15 are healthy school certified?

Problem 7: What is the average school Safety Score?

Problem 8: List the top 5 Community Areas by average College Enrollment

Problem 9: Use a sub-query to determine which Community Area has the least value for school Safety Score?

Problem 10: (Without using an explicit JOIN operator) Find the Per Capita Income of the Community Area which has a school Safety Score of 1.

Related Questions & Answers:

• Graded Quiz: Basic SQL Graded Quiz: Basic SQL >> Databases and SQL for Data Science with Python TOTAL POINTS 5     1.True or ... Read more...
• Graded Quiz: Relational DB Concepts and Tables Graded Quiz: Relational DB Concepts and Tables >> Databases and SQL for Data Science with Python 1.Which of the following ... Read more...
• Graded Quiz: Refining Your Results Graded Quiz: Refining Your Results >> Databases and SQL for Data Science with Python 1.You want to select author’s last ... Read more...
• Graded Quiz: Functions, Sub-Queries, Multiple Tables Graded Quiz: Functions, Sub-Queries, Multiple Tables >> Databases and SQL for Data Science with Python 1.Which of the following queries ... Read more...
• Graded Quiz: Database access from Python Graded Quiz: Database access from Python >> Databases and SQL for Data Science with Python 1.The ibm_db API provides a ... Read more...
• Final Exam Final Exam >> Databases and SQL for Data Science with Python 1.The ______ statement is called a query, and the ... Read more...

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Help Articles

Write peer reviews, learner help center sep 17, 2021 • knowledge, article details.

When an assignment is peer reviewed, you'll get feedback from other people taking the course. You'll also need to review other people's assignments and give them feedback.

You'll be asked to start giving peer reviews as soon as you submit your own assignment .

Tips for giving useful feedback

When you give feedback, your name may be visible to the person you’re reviewing. If your instructor has anonymous feedback turned on, you’ll see a notice before submitting.

To give useful feedback, always try to include:

• Positive feedback about what they did well
• Helpful suggestions for how to improve
• Specific comments about why you gave the grade you chose

When giving peer feedback, never include:

• Comments about things that aren't part of the assignment, like the writer's political beliefs or language skills
• Personal attacks

Solve problems with feedback

If you're having trouble giving helpful feedback, ask for help in the course's discussion forums .

If you believe someone is plagiarizing or violating Coursera's Honor Code, you can report them .

If you come across an assignment that has a broken link or is missing content, please mark your peer's assignment with a 0, and describe the problem in the comments.

Related Articles

• Number of Views 60.53K
• Number of Views 216.4K
• Number of Views 187.43K
• Number of Views 279.93K
• Number of Views 2.31M

© 2021 Coursera Inc. All rights reserved.

Peer Evaluations

In order to receive a grade for this course, you must turn in a final report. This report will be like the two-week reports in that you will be looking back on your work on the game and evaluating what went right and what went wrong. However, this final report is different in two important ways. First of all, you are to look back at the entire semester, and not just the last two weeks. Furthermore, in contrast to previous reports, every group member must submit an different individual report .

The reason for requiring individual reports is that, in the end, we will be assigning individual grades. Therefore, we want to fairly assess the contribution of each team member to the group. In order to do this, we need private peer evaluations. In a peer evaluation, you will write a separate evaluation for each member of the group. That way, every person will have a peer review written about them by every member in the group. For each of you, we will gather all of the peer evaluations your peers have written about you, and then use our best judgement (throw out students with clear personally conflicts, average scores, etc.) to use these values to determine your final grade on the game project (which is 50% your total grade).

In addition to the peer evaluations, we want you to submit a course evaluation. You will notice in CMS that there is a survey titled “Course Evaluation”. The purpose of this survey is to get some feedback about the course and determine what can be done better next time. This course is being modified every year based upon the type of feedback in these surveys.

You should write an evaluation for each member of your group including yourself . This will help us understand whether you think that what your teammates wrote about you is fair or not. How you format the evaluation is up to you. However, they should all have the following format.

First of all, you should provide a short answer to each of the following questions about the person you are evaluating:

• From what you have seen, what are this member’s greatest strengths?
• From what you have seen, what are this member’s greatest weaknesses?
• Would you ever work with this person again? Why or why not?

Next, you should assign that person a numerical score (3 to 0) in each of the following areas. Please pay attention to our interpretation of the numerical score for each category . These are not absolute grades; they are relative grades that we use to adjust an individual’s grade from the game grade.

Participation

3 points : This member consistently and punctually showed up to meetings (in allowance of his or her schedule), attended milestone presentations and work days, and contributed to discussions within the group.

2 points : This member was always (or mostly) present, but perhaps had less of a voice in the development of the game.

1 point : This member was often absent, but still got his or her work done. The particpation was limited to working on assigned tasks.

0 points : This member was absent or missing for long stretches of time. The team effectively had one less person.

3 points : This member stayed focused and task-oriented on what he or she had to do at all times. The team member was well aware of the milestones and two-week breakdowns, and consistently met deadlines.

2 points : This member always met deadlines, but often had to be reminded by other team members to stay on target.

1 point : This member missed one or more significant deadlines. This includes material that was completed the night before a presentation and was too late to incorporate into the demo.

0 points : This member constantly missed deadlines, creating extra work for everyone else.

Quantity of Work

3 points : This member contributed an amount of work that either met or exceeded the expectations for the team. In other words, this member “carried their own weight”, and many times did more.

2 points : This member did everything that was asked of him or her, but only what was asked. This member rarely did anything extra to improve the quality of a sprint.

1 point : This member consistently did less work than everyone else. The work was usable, but there was significantly less of it.

0 points : This member did almost no work and might as well have not been part of the team.

Quality of Work

3 points : The work produced by this member was of a quality that either met or exceeded the expectations for the team. The member was very knowledgable in the development role allocated, and never had to be reassigned because of poor quality work.

2 points : The team member either had to be reassigned to find a task that he or she was suitable at, or the code/asset quality required some additional work to integrate it into the main code base.

1 point : The team member produced code/assets that were consistently marginal in quality. A few times the team member might have even produced negative work.

0 points : This team member did significant negative work and held the team back.

3 points : This team member respected other ideas and opinions within the group. It was an absolute pleasure to work with this person.

2 points : There were some minor disputes with this team member, but it was still possible to work with him or her. Most of the disagreements where handled professionally.

1 point : This student was occasionally unprofessional in dealing with other team members. There were a few disagreements that got emotionally heated.

0 points : This team member created a truly toxic atmosphere.

Productivity

3 points : This team member motivated the team and contributed to the productive atmosphere. This is not about quantity of work (which you already graded). It is whether this person consistently took initiative to work on the project and get things done, even without being asked.

2 points : The team member had to be assigned tasks, but always did what was asked of them. This person was a useful “cog in the wheel” for your team.

1 point : The team member produced useful work, but required constant micomanagement that actually hurt the morale of the team.

0 points : This student did significant negative work and held the team back.

Overall Grade

Based on all of the items that you have evaluated above, you should assign an overall grade to this team member. This is not actually the grade that I will assign. Remember that individual grades use the group grade as a baseline, so what I really care about is the relative performance of each person in the group. Therefore, your should consider all of my guidelines above in assignment the final grade.

In general, I think of grades as follows:

• A : This person was absolutely crucial to the success of the project.
• B : This person was a solid worker and accomplished every task given.
• C : This person was a weak member of the team, but still provided useful work.
• D : This person held the team back by producing negative work.
• F : This person made no contributions at all (almost never given).

You should also feel free to include whatever additional comments that you would like to make regarding this evaluation.

Due : Mon, May 20 at 11:59 PM

You should submit the file to peereval to CMS. This file includes your evaluation of all of the members of your group including yourself . Use the guidelines above to produce your evaluations. As usual, please submit this file as a PDF.

In addition, you should fill out the “Course Evaluation” survey in CMS .

Navigation Menu

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests..., provide feedback.

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly.

To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation .

• Notifications

I was provided with an empty Jupyterlite notebook which I launched in the course, to complete this assignment. I needed to include a combination of markdown and code cells. I did not needed to use the Markdown cheat sheet to help me determine the appropriate syntax for my markdown

Sohamkantijana/Peer-graded-Assignment-Submit-Your-Work-and-Grade-Your-Peers

Folders and files, repository files navigation, peer-graded-assignment-submit-your-work-and-grade-your-peers.

I was provided with an empty Jupyter notebook which I launched in the course, to complete this assignment. I needed to include a combination of markdown and code cells. I did not needed to use the Markdown cheat sheet to help me determine the appropriate syntax for my markdown

• Jupyter Notebook 100.0%