A Three-Year Study on Peer Evaluation in a Software Engineering Project Course
Miguel Ehécatl Morales-Trujillo, Matthias Galster, Fabian Gilson, Moffat Mathews
Abstract
<italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Background:</i> Peer evaluation in software engineering (SE) project courses enhances the learning experience of students. It also helps instructors monitor and assess both teams and individual students. Peer evaluations might influence the way individual students and teams work; therefore, the quality of the peer evaluations should be tracked through the project course. <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Contribution:</i> In this article, we analyzed the quality and scoring behavior of students in peer evaluation in an undergraduate SE project course over three years. <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Research Questions:</i> RQ1: What is the quality of peer evaluation of undergraduate students in a SE project course? RQ2: How do undergraduate students in an SE project course score each other? <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Methodology:</i> The quality of peer evaluation (length, level of detail, etc.) and scoring of peers based on various aspects of peer evaluations of third-year students in a year-long SE project course were studied. Taking into account the grade students received at the end of the course (A, B, C, and F-calibers), peer evaluations were categorized, analyzed over time, and compared between students calibers. <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Findings:</i> After analyzing 6854 peer evaluations from 193 students, it was found that the quality of peer evaluations across students was mostly consistent throughout the course. Also, it was observed that quantitative aspects of the peer evaluation were scored similarly across student calibers. However, the qualitative aspects of the peer evaluation were impacted by the caliber of students. These findings suggest that weaker students (i.e., C-caliber students) generally receive better quality peer evaluations than stronger students (i.e., A-caliber students). Finally, a preliminary analysis showed a positive connotation of emotions and sentiments found in the textual feedback delivered by students.