Background
Hans-Petter Hersleth had used peer review in BIOS1130 for several years before the Feedback Fruits pilot. His experience with both Peer Grade and Canvas made him well placed to evaluate FF's relative strengths and limitations. When the project group opened a call for spring 2024 pilot courses, he was among the first to express interest.
Setup
Feedback Fruits was used for peer review of two different mandatory laboratory reports submitted during the semester. The predefined question structure — where the teacher sets up specific criteria or questions students must respond to when giving feedback — was central to how Hersleth structured the peer review.
Results and Teacher Evaluation
Hersleth conducted his own course evaluation survey at the end of the semester, the results of which he shared with the project group:
- The course overall received an average score of 4.2 out of 5.
- Peer review received an average of 3.4 out of 5 — slightly lower than the course overall, which is consistent with students finding peer review more demanding.
- 46% of students said they learned "a lot" from engaging with the predefined feedback questions.
- Students reported learning more from giving feedback than from receiving it.
- 39% said peer review "somewhat" helped them improve their own report; 31% said "a lot"; 8% said "a great deal."
- 46% of students thought peer review should be used in more courses at the Department of Biosciences — with only 15% disagreeing.
- 85% of students gave Feedback Fruits a score of 4 or 5 out of 5.
Hersleth noted that this adoption rate — roughly half of students supporting broader use — was similar to what he saw with Peer Grade, but significantly higher than when he used Canvas' built-in tool, where very few students supported expanding its use. His conclusion: for peer review to succeed, a dedicated platform matters.
Conclusion
BIOS1130 demonstrated that Feedback Fruits scales well to mid-sized science courses and integrates effectively with lab report workflows. The predefined question feature was particularly well-suited to guiding students through structured scientific feedback.