Talk:Peer Evaluation/User Interface
|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|Alternative UI options||1||05:27, 19 May 2014|
- We use a distributed network of blogs for (most?) student assignments. The facilitator can request students register their blog URLs when they sign up for a course, and then the WEnotes harvester can collect appropriately tagged posts and put an abridged post in the WEnotes stream. A extremely minimalist UI might be to simply have the reviewer comment on the blog post. The harvester could recognize new comments and (a) add them to the stream and (b) keep track of which blog posts had been commented on (and by whom if desired). We could as students to use keywords (+1?) for acceptable or excellent posts.
- Perhaps expand the "favorite star" in the WEnotes feed to include multiple stars or grades (some minimalist/iconic unacceptable/acceptable/excellent marking). This has the advantages that:
- the link to the blog post is already at hand
- some sort of running score could be displayed in WEnotes (excluding best/worst etc.)
- Or perhaps more effectively, make the reply arrow on blog post entries in WEnotes open a user interface that includes:
- unacceptable/acceptable/excellent selection
- WEnotes size comment field (encouraging concise comments)
- display of how many items you have reviewed for that particular course
- This has the advantage that you could build in karma rankings and even allow ranking the evaluation... rather like the Ask.OERu.org rating on responses.
For option (3) above, I could imagine clicking on the reply (or a reply-like evaluation) icon and having a jQuery modal Dialog box opening that contained:
Evaluation of Jeeve's Post[edit | edit source]
_ Unacceptable _ Acceptable _ Excellent
3 course items reviewed 1 review has been starred
Header identifies the item being reviewed. Data could be stored in the WEnotes (CouchDB) database.