Which approach to groups is best?

JavaScript isn't enabled in your browser, so this file can't be opened. Enable and reload.

Eli Review is a course tool for peer feedback and revision. We are working on automated group formation tools that balance the workload across groups of all sizes, and we need your input about how to assign groups.

We value a tight give-and-take in peer review: reviewers give feedback to writers and also take feedback from them. Peers’ accountability to each other encourages a helpful feedback culture. But, evenly dividing groups is sometimes impossible.

What do you recommend in these two scenarios?

Scenario 1. Twenty-three (23) students submit drafts. To ensure that most students give and receive 3 reviews, which approach is best?

Tight Give-and-Take Even Load: 2 groups of 4 peers, and 3 groups of 5 peers with robot adjusting the workload. Students in the large groups (shown as red boxes) would ONLY give feedback to three peers, keeping the workload even. They may give feedback to one writer who doesn’t also give them feedback.

Loose Give-and-Take, Even Load: 4 groups of 4 peers,1 group of 7 peers with robot adjusting workload. Students in the large group (shown as red box) would ONLY give feedback to three peers, keeping the workload even. They are unlikely to give feedback to the same writers who give them feedback.

Clear selection

What led to your preference? For example, were you most concerned about workload, give-and-take reciprocity, fairness, or some other value or constraint? *

Scenario 2. Assume on-time writers are grouped such that everyone gives and receives 3 reviews. Seven (7) writers submit drafts late. Which approach is best? *

Tight Give-and-Take, Balance and Reduce Workload: 1 group of 3 peers, 1 group of 4 peers with robot adjusting workload. Unlike the on-time writers who give feedback to 3 peers, late students would only give feedback to 2 peers. In the large group of late writers (shown as red box), reviewers may give feedback to one writer who doesn’t also give them feedback.

Loose Give-and-Take, Even Load: 1 group of 7 peers with robot adjusting workload. Like the on-time writers, late writers would ONLY give feedback to three peers (shown as red box). They are unlikely to give feedback to the same writers who give them feedback.

No Late Writers: 0 groups, 7 peers excluded. Given the complexities of the class, writers who submit late should NOT participate in peer review.

What led to your preference for managing late writers? For example, were you most concerned about workload, give-and-take reciprocity, fairness, or some other value or constraint? *

How many students normally enroll in your Eli Review courses? *

5-30 students

31-100 students

101-500 students

more than 500 students

What else would you like us to know about your reactions to these grouping options?

Submit

Clear form

Never submit passwords through Google Forms.

This form was created inside of Eli Review. Report Abuse

Forms