Peer Review

Links to Peer Reviews:

Main Feedback Notes:

Most reviewers mentioned the following things we could improve on:

  • A major point in all of the peer reviews was making the interactive programming portion less confusing for users
  • The design was confusing in some places for some users.
  • Many reviewers seemed to be confused by the structure of the outline.
  • More examples are needed in the “conditionals” section.
  • One reviewer mentioned that we should include “specific details on how to download compilers” and “more details about the programming language being taught” could be included.
  • A barrier to doing the assessments could be having a Google account for the Google Forms based assessments.
  • One reviewer was confused about what “motivation for learning to program” meant.
  • Too many pages of just text.
  • One reviewer mentioned they were having trouble using the interactive elements on the site

What Feedback We Incorporated and Rationale:

Making the interactive programming portion less confusing for users:

In order to make the interactive programming portion of our resource less confusing for users, we decided to make it clear that this interactive portion of the Learning Resource was fully optional and not for marks. We also standardized the text below the interactive programming portion so the instructions are easier to understand.

Too many pages of just text:

We added images to the following pages (course overview, learning outcomes) in order to address this issue. We also found that large blocks of text were harder to read, and it was better if they were separated by images.

Adding more examples in the “conditionals” section:

To address this point we added two more optional readings to the bottom of the Conditionals page so that if learners feel that the page doesn’t have enough examples, they can refer to the extra readings.

Having trouble using the interactive elements on the site:

After testing out our ILR ourselves, we found that the interactive learning elements may be linked to a Browser issue. If you’re using Safari, you may have a bit of trouble, but it should be perfectly fine to use on Google Chrome.

What Feedback We Didn’t Incorporate and Rationale:


Deciding not to include “specific details on how to download compilers” and “more details about the programming language being taught”:

We aimed for a language-agnostic approach to teaching programming and decided that Python was the most straightforward language in terms of human readability. This is why we didn’t focus as much on the programming language itself but rather on the concepts behind the programming language.

Not necessarily needing a Google account for the Google Forms-based assessments:

As we mentioned on the Learning Context and Inclusive Design page, we plan to include a PDF version of our resource for those who may not have sufficient access to technology. The PDF version of the resource would also include assessments, which we feel address the problem of needing a Google account.

Addressing the confusion about what “motivation for learning to program” means in the context of our resource:

“Motivation for learning to program” refers to a program designed to help learners develop motivation and interest in learning how to program. The resource provides learners with strategies and techniques to develop and maintain motivation and insights into the importance of motivation in the learning process. It also offers practical examples and exercises to help learners apply these strategies and techniques in real-world situations. By doing so, the learning resource can help learners develop a strong foundation for successful learning and development in programming. So, we think our resource fulfills the mentioned requirement.

The rationale for structuring the outline the way we did:

The course outline highlights the topics being taught in the resource and in order to have easy access to each topic, we made separate tiles with each topic explained individually. We also modeled the outline off of the rubric for necessary elements to include in the Learning Resource. Finally, we felt that including links in many places makes it clear which sections correspond to the same page.