Update feedback prediction from changes from feedback

bibliography.bib

@@ -568,6 +568,20 @@
   publisher = {{April}}
 }
 
+@misc{brunsfeldTreesitterTreesitterV02024,
+  title = {Tree-Sitter/Tree-Sitter: V0.20.9},
+  shorttitle = {Tree-Sitter/Tree-Sitter},
+  author = {Brunsfeld, Max and Hlynskyi, Andrew and Qureshi, Amaan and Thomson, Amaan and Josh Vera and Phil Turnbull and Timothy Clem and Douglas Creager and Andrew Helwer and Rob Rix and {Hendrik van Antwerpen} and Daumantas Kavolis and Michael Davis and Ika and {Tuấn-Anh Nguyễn} and Matt Massicotte and Stafford Brunk and Amin Yahyaabadi and Niranjan Hasabnis and {bfredl} and Mingkai Dong and Samuel Moelius and Jonathan Arnett and Vladimir Panteleev and Kolja and Steven Kalt and Linda\_pp and George Fraser and Edgar},
+  year = {2024},
+  month = jan,
+  doi = {10.5281/ZENODO.4619183},
+  url = {https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.4619183},
+  urldate = {2024-02-05},
+  abstract = {An incremental parsing system for programming tools},
+  copyright = {Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International},
+  howpublished = {Zenodo}
+}
+
 @inproceedings{caizaProgrammingAssignmentsAutomatic2013,
   title = {Programming Assignments Automatic Grading: Review of Tools and Implementations},
   shorttitle = {Programming Assignments Automatic Grading},
@@ -844,6 +858,24 @@
   file = {/home/charlotte/sync/Zotero/storage/SWALKR7I/Dawyndt - 2004 - Knowledge accumulation of microbial data aiming at.pdf}
 }
 
+@article{debuseEducatorsPerceptionsAutomated2008,
+  title = {Educators' Perceptions of Automated Feedback Systems},
+  author = {Debuse, Justin C. W. and Lawley, Meredith and Shibl, Rania},
+  year = {2008},
+  month = aug,
+  journal = {Australasian Journal of Educational Technology},
+  volume = {24},
+  number = {4},
+  issn = {1449-5554},
+  doi = {10.14742/ajet.1198},
+  url = {https://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/view/1198},
+  urldate = {2024-02-05},
+  abstract = {Assessment of student learning is a core function of educators. Ideally students should be provided with timely, constructive feedback to facilitate learning. However, provision of high quality feedback becomes more complex as class sizes increase, modes of study expand and academic workloads increase. ICT solutions are being developed to facilitate quality feedback, whilst not impacting adversely upon staff workloads. Hence the research question of this study is 'How do academic staff perceive the usefulness of an automated feedback system in terms of impact on workloads and quality of feedback?' This study used an automated feedback generator (AFG) across multiple tutors and assessment items within an MBA course delivered in a variety of modes. All academics marking in the course completed a survey based on an adaptation of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model. Results indicated that while the workload impact was generally positive with savings in both cost and time, improvements and modifications to the system could further reduce workloads. Furthermore, results indicated that AFG improves quality in terms of timeliness, greater consistency between markers and an increase in the amount of feedback provided.},
+  copyright = {Copyright (c)},
+  langid = {english},
+  file = {/home/charlotte/sync/Zotero/storage/2LQ5RKYB/Debuse et al. - 2008 - Educators' perceptions of automated feedback syste.pdf}
+}
+
 @article{demmeApproximateGraphClustering2012,
   title = {Approximate Graph Clustering for Program Characterization},
   author = {Demme, John and Sethumadhavan, Simha},
@@ -3490,6 +3522,26 @@
   pages = {82--83}
 }
 
+@article{tuckFeedbackgivingSocialPractice2012,
+  title = {Feedback-Giving as Social Practice: Teachers' Perspectives on Feedback as Institutional Requirement, Work and Dialogue},
+  shorttitle = {Feedback-Giving as Social Practice},
+  author = {Tuck, Jackie},
+  year = {2012},
+  month = apr,
+  journal = {Teaching in Higher Education},
+  volume = {17},
+  number = {2},
+  pages = {209--221},
+  publisher = {{Routledge}},
+  issn = {1356-2517},
+  doi = {10.1080/13562517.2011.611870},
+  url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2011.611870},
+  urldate = {2024-02-05},
+  abstract = {The lived experience of academic teachers as they engage in feedback has received relatively little attention compared to student perspectives on feedback. The present study used an ethnographically informed methodology to investigate the everyday practices around undergraduates' writing of fourteen UK HE teachers, in a range of disciplines and institutions, focusing on teachers' perspectives. This paper presents analysis of interviews conducted as part of the study, in which feedback-giving emerged as significant, understood by participants in several potentially dissonant ways: as institutional requirement, as work and as dialogue. Findings suggest participants sometimes managed to reconcile these conflicts and carve out small spaces for dialogue with students, and also indicate that attempts to create greater opportunities for such work, by offering greater support and recognition at institutional level, must take account of teachers' need for a sense of personal investment in student writing in their disciplinary contexts.},
+  keywords = {academic literacies,dialogue,feedback,marking,student writing},
+  file = {/home/charlotte/sync/Zotero/storage/ADGIU3TT/tuck2012.pdf.pdf;/home/charlotte/sync/Zotero/storage/BATEHHLL/Tuck - 2012 - Feedback-giving as social practice teachers’ pers.pdf}
+}
+
 @article{tuomiOpenEducationalResources2013,
   title = {Open {{Educational Resources}} and the {{Transformation}} of {{Education}}},
   author = {Tuomi, Ilkka},