Background and Problem
Prior to the Feedback Fruits pilot, learning assistants (master's students) had manually distributed student submissions so that peers could give feedback. This process had generated several recurring difficulties: unclear deadlines for each step, no fair system for managing extensions, and insufficient guidance on what kind of feedback students were expected to provide.
These challenges made HIS3090 a natural candidate for the spring 2024 pilot.
Setup
Feedback Fruits was used for two rounds of peer review across the semester. The course administrator, Marthe Bogen, worked with the project group to set up the assignments and manage the process. One of the features that proved especially valuable was the ability to define custom feedback criteria — in this case, criteria drawn from an assessment guide that students were already familiar with from earlier in their studies.
Teacher and Administrator Experience
Administrator Marthe Bogen highlighted the criteria feature as the standout element of the pilot: the ability to import the department's own assessment guide as feedback criteria both clarified expectations for students and ensured consistency across the peer review process.
Bogen also identified an important question for any future university-wide implementation: who is responsible for supporting teachers and administrators in using Feedback Fruits? She recommended that each faculty or department designate a local Feedback Fruits expert, rather than leaving individual course coordinators to navigate the platform's many options alone.
Bogen's overall verdict was positive. She recommended adopting Feedback Fruits and identified several other courses at the Department of Archaeology, Conservation and History where the tool could be used.
Conclusion
HIS3090 illustrates how Feedback Fruits can replace an error-prone manual process with a structured, scalable digital workflow — while preserving the faculty's own pedagogical traditions through customisable criteria.