(3.239.192.241) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/03/02 19:26
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:柯劭珩
研究生(外文):Shao-Heng Ko
論文名稱:促進大型開放式線上課程中的同儕互評
論文名稱(外文):Encouraging Peer Grading in MOOCs
指導教授:陳和麟
口試委員:葉丙成于天立孔令傑
口試日期:2017-05-31
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:電機工程學研究所
學門:工程學門
學類:電資工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2017
畢業學年度:105
語文別:英文
論文頁數:39
中文關鍵詞:賽局理論大型開放式線上課程同儕互評納許均衡機制設計
外文關鍵詞:Game TheoryMassive Open Online CoursesPeer GradingNash EquilibriumMechanism Design
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:150
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
在大型開放式線上課程 (MOOCs) 當中,
由於學習者數量極為龐大,高階學習表現通常只能透過同儕互評 (Peer Grading) 的方式來評量。
在MOOCs中實施同儕互評時,學習者通常缺乏為其他人評分的動機,因而沒有付出足夠的心力。
為改善此現象,我們考慮讓學習者的成績與其評量他人的準確度相關的機制,並建立相關的賽局理論模型,以分析學習者在此機制下的理性行為。
我們發現一組能保證純粹均衡存在的條件,在此條件下,課程設計者將可透過調整機制參數的方式,促進學習者投資更多的心力在評分之上。
更進一步,若學習者之間具有同質性時,我們證明在所有純粹均衡當中,所有為同一份作業評分的學習者都會付出恰相等的時間。
藉由這個性質,我們能夠計算所有可能的純粹均衡點。
我們將上述結果推廣到某些學習者並非採取理性策略的狀況,並討論如何在實際情況中應用本研究的結果。
Due to huge participant sizes in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), peer grading is practically the only existing solution to grading high-level assignments. One of the main issues of utilizing peer grading in MOOCs is that learners are not motivated and do not spend enough effort in grading. To modify current peer grading mechanism to induce better grading, we focus on the idea of making the learners'' grade depend on the accuracy of their grading of others'' work. We built a game theoretical model to characterize the rational behavior of learners in such a mechanism. We found a set of conditions which guarantees existence of pure-strategy equilibria. When the conditions are satisfied, the course designer can encourage the learners to spend more time on grading through tuning the mechanism parameters. Furthermore, when the learners are assumed to be homogeneous, we proved that in any pure equilibrium, any submitted work will be graded with identical effort by the relevant graders. With this property all the possible pure equilibria are theoretically calculable. We also extended our result to the case where some of the learners are not strategic or rational. We discussed applications of our results in practical situations.
誌謝v
摘要vii
Abstract ix
1 Introduction 1
2 Model 7
2.1 Players and Actions 7
2.2 Grading Mechanism 8
2.3 Utility 9
2.4 Decomposition of Model 10
3 Analysis 13
3.1 Encouraging Conditions and Existence of Equilibria 13
3.2 Encouraging Peer Grading 16
3.3 Settings That Meet the Encouraging Conditions 18
4 Homogeneous Grading 23
5 Peer Grading with Irrational Players 27
6 Discussion and Future Work 31
6.1 Other Game Settings 31
6.2 Setting Up the Parameters in Practice 31
6.3 Average Amount of Graders 32
6.4 Unbalanced Peer Grading Tasks 33
6.5 Towards Biased Grading 34
6.6 Concensus Grading 34
Bibliography 37
[1] D. Boud, R. Cohen, and J. Sampson, editors. Peer learning in higher education. 2001.
[2] S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe. Convex optimization, section 3.2, page 79. Seventh edition, 2004.
[3] A. U. Carbonara, A. Datta, A. Sinha, and Y. Zick. Incentivizing peer grading in moocs: An audit game approach. In International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence, ICJAI ’15, pages 497–503, 2015.
[4] K. Cho, C. D. Schunn, and R. W. Wilson. Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Educational
Psychology, 98(4):891–901, 2006.
[5] Coursera. See feedback and grades for peer reviewed assignments, 2017.
[6] L. de Alfaro and M. Shavlovsky. Crowdgrader: a tool for crowdsourcing the evaluation of homework assignments. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, SIGCSE ’14, pages 415–420, 2014.
[7] L. de Alfaro and M. Shavlovsky. Dynamics of peer grading: An empirical study. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, EDM
’16, pages 62–69, 2016.
[8] F. Dochy, M. Segers, and D. Sluijsmans. The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3):331–350, 1999.
[9] N. Falchikov and J. Goldfinch. Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3):287–322, 2000.
[10] A. Fox. From moocs to spocs. Communications of the ACM, 56(12):38–40, 2013.
[11] S. Freeman and J. W. Parks. How accurate is peer grading? CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9(4):482–488, 2010.
[12] S. Halawa, D. Greene, and J. Mitchell. Dropout prediction in moocs using learner activity features. Experiences and best practices in and around MOOCs, (37):7–16, 2014.
[13] M. B. Hoy. Moocs 101: an introduction to massive open online courses. Medical reference services quarterly, 33(1):85–91, 2014.
[14] M. Kloft, F. Stiehler, Z. Zheng, and N. Pinkwart. Predicting mooc dropout over weeks using machine learning methods. In Proceedings of the EMNLP 2014 Workshop
on Analysis of Large Scale Social Interaction in MOOCs, pages 60–65, 2014.
[15] N.-F. Liu and D. Carless. Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3):279–290, 2006.
[16] Y. Lu, J. Warren, C. Jermaine, S. Chaudhuri, and S. Rixner. Grading the graders: Motivating peer graders in a mooc. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference
on World Wide Web, WWW ’15, pages 680–690, 2015.
[17] H. Luo, A. C. Robinson, and J.-Y. Park. Peer grading in a mooc: Reliability, validity, and perceived effects. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 18(2):n2, 2014.
[18] C. Piech, J. Huang, Z. Chen, C. B. Do, A. Y. Ng, and D. Koller. Tuned models of peer assessment in moocs. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on
Educational Data Mining (EDM 2013), EDM ’13, pages 153–160, 2013.
[19] P. M. Sadler and E. Good. The impact of self- and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(1):1–31, 2006.
[20] L. A. Stefani. Peer, self and tutor assessment: Relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19(1):69–75, 1994.
[21] K. Topping. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3):249–276, 1998.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔