  In computer science, students could benefit from more opportunities to learn
important, high-level concepts and to improve their learning skills. Peer
review is one method to encourage this by providing students with the
opportunity to evaluate other people's work and to receive feedback on their
own projects. This allows for rich learning experience but it is not
immediately obvious how to create a programming project review that will
improve the students' conceptual understanding, require higher level thinking,
and be engaging. The current literature does not typically address differences
between review implementations or provide reasons for design decisions. This
work explored how two different types of reviews affected the students'
learning of concepts, high-level thinking, and engagement. There were
indications that the type of review affected how well students addressed the
concept they were reviewing and the comments' length. This shows that the
review's type may affect student engagement and conceptual learning. There were
also differences in how they reviewed the concepts of Abstraction,
Decomposition, and Encapsulation, suggesting that the concepts are being
learned in different ways. Both of these results have an impact on the use of
peer review computer science but need further investigation.
