Authors are notified

posted Jun 15, 2016, 12:47 PM by Ferry Pramudianto
After the PC members worked hard to provide detailed feedback, we decided to accept the following papers to be presented in the workshop. 

#

title

decision

222

When Trying to Be Helpful, Peer Reviews Are Also More Accurate

ACCEPT AS SHORT

223

Peer Review Data Warehouse: Insights From Different Systems

ACCEPT AS SHORT

225

Impact of Revision Planning on Peer-Reviewed Writing

ACCEPT AS SHORT

217

Who Took PeerReview Seriously: Another Perspective on Student-Generated Quizzes

ACCEPT AS FULL

221

Prediction of Grades for Reviewing with Automated Peer-review and Reputation Metrics

ACCEPT AS FULL

224

Probing the Landscape: A Systematic Meta-review of Online Peer Assessment Systems in Education

ACCEPT AS FULL

229

Teaching students to give and to receive: improving disciplinary writing through peer review

ACCEPT AS FULL

218

Assessing the Quality of Automatic Summarization for Peer Review in Education

ACCEPT AS POSTER

219

The role of initial input in reputation systems to generate accurate aggregated grades from peer assessment

ACCEPT AS FULL

226

Automated Metareviewing: A Classifier Approach to Assess the Quality of Reviews

ACCEPT AS POSTER

220

Toward Better Training in Peer Assessment: Does Calibration Help?

ACCEPT AS POSTER

227

Choosing a better moment to assign reviewers in peer assessment: the earlier the better? or the later the better?

ACCEPT AS POSTER

Comments