CRAFT Collaborative Review and Feedback Technology

Pilots

The pilot involved six courses across two faculties, with over 1,000 enrolled students and approximately 850 active users of the platform:

• IN1020 – Introduction to Computer Technology (500+ students, MN)
• Exphil – Philosophy of Science (90 students, HF)
• BIOS1130 – Biology laboratory reports (125 students, MN)
• HIS3090 – Bachelor's thesis in History (90 students, HF)
• KONS3061 – Conservation studies (25 students, HF)
• SPA4504 – Spanish master's course (6 students, HF)

Each course used Feedback Fruits differently — from large-scale compulsory assignments with self- and peer assessment to live in-classroom peer review sessions and term paper feedback across multiple rounds.

Key Findings

In IN1020, students were randomly assigned to one of three feedback conditions: peer assessment (PA), self-assessment (SA), or teaching assistant feedback (TA). All three interventions led to statistically significant improvement from first draft to final submission. The peer assessment group achieved the highest average exam score (67.08%), compared to self-assessment (62.85%) and teaching assistant feedback (62.59%). Notably, peer assessment outperformed teaching assistant feedback across most student performance levels, with the exception of students near the pass/fail threshold where TA feedback had a stronger effect.

Student surveys showed that 95% of Exphil students rated Feedback Fruits as intuitive to use, despite having no prior experience with the system. Across all spring 2024 courses, 67% of respondents gave the system a score of 5 or 6 out of 6 on intuitiveness, and 76% rated peer review as academically beneficial.

Teachers across all pilot courses reported positively on the platform, highlighting the criteria-based feedback structure, the ability to reuse assignment templates, and the ease of managing individual deadline extensions as particularly valuable features.

Recommendation

Based on the findings from student and teacher surveys and the project group's experience throughout the pilot period, the project group strongly recommends that UiO engage in strategic discussions with Feedback Fruits to explore licensing options and develop an implementation plan to make the system available to all teachers at UiO.

Publications and Awards

Main report (white-paper): 

• Kleivane, H. E., Tandberg, A., and Mirmotahari, O. (2024). Peer Review with Feedback Fruits — Final Project Report. SK-ITU, University of Oslo.

Scientific conference paper: (peer-reviewed and best paper award)

• Mirmotahari, O. and Berg, Y. (2024). Trenger vi læringsassistenter? Hvordan kan hverandrevurdering og/eller egenvurdering gi godt læringsutbytte. Presented at NIKT 2024. Best Paper Award, Udit 2024.

Success story on FeedbackFruits' web page: 

• Ferre, C. "The University of Oslo's case for peer review in large-enrollment courses"

Funding

This project was funded by SK-ITU as part of UiO's strategic investment in digital learning tools and pedagogical development.