Over the past decade, web-based peer reviews have been used to supplement instructor feedback on student work. Peer reviews scale well with class size, and have been shown to increase the frequency and quantity of feedback students receive. Recent work in the domain of design has shown that nearly half of the web-based peer reviews included praise and lacked suggestions for improvement of work. Inspired by the studio model of design critique, we examined the effect of collaborative team review generation on feedback characteristics in contrast to that generated by individual reviewers. In an exploratory study, students from a large sophomore-level engineering design class reviewed their peers’ design logbooks. Students in the team review group evaluated their peers’ work collectively and synchronously, generating a single review. Individual reviewers followed the current standard of reviewing work independently. A coding scheme was developed to analyze the feedback. We found that team reviews, when compared to individual reviews, supplied more ideas per review, more design suggestions to consider, and were more critical of their peers’ work. These trends indicate that team reviews can potentially improve the usefulness of feedback generated, and creates a basis for future exploration of this space.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.