Tag Archives: peer

CAN YOU PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE MENTORSHIP AND PEER FEEDBACK DURING THE CAPSTONE PROCESS

Leave a reply

The capstone project is intended to be a culmination of the skills and knowledge gained throughout the Nanodegree program. It provides students an opportunity to demonstrate their proficiency and ability to independently develop and complete a project from concept to deployment using the tools and techniques learned.

To help guide students through this ambitious independent project, Udacity provides both mentorship support and a structured peer feedback system. Mentors are industry professionals who review student work and provide guidance to help ensure projects meet specifications and stay on track. Students also rely on feedback from their peers to improve their work before final submission.

Each student is assigned a dedicated capstone mentor from Udacity’s pool of experienced mentors at the start of the capstone. Mentors have deep expertise in the relevant technical field and have additionally received training from Udacity on providing constructive guidance and feedback. The role of the mentor is to review interim project work and hold check-in meetings to discuss challenges, evaluate progress, and offer targeted advice for improvement.

Mentors provide guidance on the design, implementation, and deployment of the project from the initial proposal, through standups and work-in-progress reviews. Students submit portions of their work—such as architecture diagrams, code samples, and prototypes—on a regular basis for mentor review. The mentor evaluates the work based on the program rubrics and provides written and verbal commentary. They look for demonstration of key skills and knowledge, adherence to best practices, and trajectory toward successful completion. Their goal is to steer students toward high-quality results through constructive criticism and suggestions.

For complex projects spanning several months, mentors typically scheduleindividual video conferences with each student every 1-2 weeks. These meetings allow for a more comprehensive check-in than written feedback alone. Students can then demonstrate live prototypes, discuss technical difficulties, and receive live coaching from their mentors. Meeting frequency may increase as project deadlines approach to ensure students stay on track. Mentors are also available via email or chat outside of formal meetings to answer any questions that come up.

In addition to mentor support, students provide peer feedback to their fellow classmates throughout the capstone. After each work-in-progress submission, students anonymously review two of their peers’ projects. They evaluate based on the same rubrics as the mentors and leave thoughtful written comments on project strengths and potential areas for improvement. Students integrate this outside perspective into further iterations of their work.

Peer feedback ensures diverse opinions beyond just the assigned mentor. It also allows students to practice evaluating projects themselves and learn from reviewing others’ work. Students have found peer feedback to be extremely valuable—seeing projects from an outside student perspective often surfaces new ideas. The feedback is also meant to be shaped as constructive suggestions rather than personal criticism.

Prior to final submission, students go through an internal “peer review” where they swap projects and conduct a deep code review with another classmate. This acts as a final checkpoint before projects are polished and submitted to the mentors for evaluation. Students find bugs, pinpoint potential improvements, and get another set of eyes to ensure their work is production-ready before the evaluation process begins.

The structured mentoring and peer review procedures employed during Nanodegree capstones are essential for guiding students through substantial self-directed projects. They allow for regular project monitoring, issues to surface early, and work to iteratively improve according to feedback. With support from both mentors and peers, students can confidently develop advanced skills and demonstrate their learning through a polished final portfolio project. The combination of human expertise and community input helps maximize the outcome of each student’s capstone experience.

CAN YOU PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE PEER FEEDBACK PROCESS IN THIS COURSE SEQUENCE

Leave a reply

The peer feedback process is an important part of the learning experience in this course sequence. It allows students to learn from each other and improve their work based on feedback from their peers. Peer feedback is incorporated into multiple assignments and activities throughout the courses to encourage collaboration, critical thinking, and the development of evaluation skills.

In most courses, students will be assigned two peer feedback partners that they provide feedback to and receive feedback from. At certain points in each course when assignments are due, the peer feedback process is initiated. Students first submit their own assignment by the due date. They are then able to access and review the work of their two assigned peer partners.

To structure the feedback, students are provided with a rubric that outlines the key criteria and learning objectives being assessed in the assignment. They are asked to thoroughly review their peers’ work based on this rubric. Students are expected to spend at least 30 minutes reviewing each assigned peer’s submission. While reviewing, they take notes on areas of strength and opportunities for improvement.

Once the review is complete, students go back to the assignment submission page to formally provide their written feedback. For each criteria item in the rubric, they indicate whether the peer’s work meets expectations, exceeds expectations, or needs improvement. They then provide a short paragraph of explanatory feedback for each rubric item. The goal is to provide constructive suggestions that will truly help the peer enhance their work. Students are not able to see the feedback their peers provide until after they have submitted their own feedback.

After submitting feedback, students have the opportunity to incorporate the peer feedback they receive into improving their own assignment submission, if desired. A revision period of 1-2 days is given before the assignment due date passes. Students can choose whether or not to make revisions based on the peer input. All assignment submissions and feedback exchanges are facilitated through the learning management system to streamline the process.

Upon receiving their feedback from two peers, students are expected to thoroughly review the comments and suggestions. They thoughtfully consider how the feedback aligns with their own self-assessment and goals for the assignment. Students are encouraged to contact their peers if they have any questions about the feedback. The feedback is intended to be a learning opportunity, not a judgement. If revisions are made based on peer input, students briefly note what changes were incorporated at the top of their revised assignment before resubmitting.

Throughout each course, instructors monitor the quality of the peer feedback being provided. If feedback appears overly brief or lacks constructive value, the instructor may provide guidance to students on how to strengthen their peer evaluation skills. Once assignments are graded, peer feedback scores make up a small percentage of the overall assignment grade. This incentive encourages students to take the process seriously and focus on crafting detailed, thoughtful feedback to benefit their peers.

At the end of each course, students complete a confidential peer feedback survey. They evaluate the feedback they received from their two partners over the course in terms of quality, usefulness, and alignment with instructor expectations. This input helps instructors identify any peers who may need additional support or guidance to successfully participate. It also allows students an opportunity for anonymous feedback in case issues arose. The surveys provide valuable insights for continuously enhancing the peer feedback process across the course sequence.

Studies have shown peer feedback can be just as effective as instructor feedback when structured properly. This established process aims to maximize the benefits of peer learning evaluation and collaboration. It equips students with important career skills like providing constructive criticism, while also motivating them to draft high quality work that will represent them well to their classmates. The peer feedback element is designed to be a low-stakes yet high-impact part of the learning experience.