  Feedback is an important aspect of design education, and crowdsourcing has
emerged as a convenient way to obtain feedback at scale. In this paper, we
investigate how crowdsourced design feedback compares to peer design feedback
within a design-oriented HCI class and across two metrics: perceived quality
and perceived fairness. We also examine the perceived monetary value of
crowdsourced feedback, which provides an interesting contrast to the typical
requester-centric view of the value of labor on crowdsourcing platforms. Our
results reveal that the students (N=106) perceived the crowdsourced design
feedback as inferior to peer design feedback in multiple ways. However, they
also identified various positive aspects of the online crowds that peers cannot
provide. We discuss the meaning of the findings and provide suggestions for
teachers in HCI and other researchers interested in crowd feedback systems on
using crowds as a potential complement to peers.
