Grading+Group+Work

=Grading Methods for Group Work=

Instructor Assessment of Group Product
The group submits one product and all group members receive the same grade, regardless of individual contribution. || * encourages group work - groups sink or swim together Individual submissions (allocated tasks or individual reports) are scored individually. The group members each receive the averageof these individual scores. || * may provide motivation for students to focus on both individual and group work and thereby develop in both areas || * may be perceived as unfair by students Each student completes an allocated task that contributes to the final group product and gets the marks for that task || * a relatively objective way of ensuring individual participation Each student writes and submits an individual report based on the group's work on the task/project || * ensures individual effort Exam questions specifically target the group projects, and can only be answered by students who have been thoroughly involved in the project || * may increase motivation to learn from the group project including learning from the other members of the group || * may diminish importance of group work
 * ==Assessment Option== || ==Advantages== || ==Disadvantages== ||
 * ===Shared Group Grade===
 * decreases likelihood of plagiarism (more likely with individual products from group work)
 * relatively straightforward method || * individual contributions are not necessarily reflected in the marks
 * stronger students may be unfairly disadvantaged by weaker ones and vice versa ||
 * ===Group Average Grade===
 * stronger students may be unfairly disadvantaged by weaker ones and vice versa ||
 * ===Individual Grade - Allocated task===
 * may provide additional motivation to students
 * potential to reward outstanding performance || * difficult to find tasks that are exactly equal in size/complexity
 * does not encourage the group process/collaboration
 * dependencies between tasks may slow progress of some ||
 * ===Individual Grade - Individual report===
 * perceived as fair by students || * precise manner in which individual reports should differ often very unclear to students
 * likelihood of unintentional plagiarism increased ||
 * ===Individual Grade - Examination===
 * additional work for staff in designing exam questions
 * may not be effective, students may be able to answer the questions by reading the group reports ||

Student Assessment of Group Product
Instructor awards a set number of scores and let the group decide how to distribute them.
 * ==Assessment Option== || ==Advantages== || ==Disadvantages== ||
 * ===Student distribution of pool of marks===

Example: 4 member group
Instructor gives shared group grade & individual grade adjusted according to a peer assessment factor.
 * Product grade: 80/100.
 * 4 * 80 = 320 pts to be distributed.
 * No one student can be given less than zero or more than 100.
 * If members decide that they all contributed equally then each get 80
 * If they decided that person A deserved much more, then A might get 95, and the remaining if equal would get 75. || * easy to implement
 * may motivate students to contribute more
 * negotiation skills become part of the learning process
 * potential to reward outstanding performance
 * may be perceived as fairer than shared or average group mark alone || * open to subjective evaluation by friends
 * may lead to conflict
 * may foster competition and therefore be counterproductive to team work
 * students may not have the skills necessary for the required negotiation ||
 * ===Students allocate individual weightings===

Example
As Above || As Above || Assessment items are anonymously completed by students who identify whether their peer has met the assessment criteria and awards a grade These grades are moderated by instructor and rating sheets returned to student. || * helps clarify criteria for assessment From Winchester- Seeto, T. (April, 2002). Assessment of collaborative work – collaboration versus assessment. Invited paper presented at the Annual Uniserve Science Symposium, The University of Sydney
 * Group Grade = 80/100
 * The individual student's peer grade ranges from .5 – 1.5, with 1 for full
 * Grade = Group grade * peer
 * Below=80 *.75 =60
 * Above=80 * 1.2 = 96 ||
 * ===Peer Evaluation - random marker, using criteria, moderated===
 * encourages sense of involvement and responsibility
 * assists students to develop skills in independent judgement
 * increases feedback to students
 * random allocation addresses potential friendship and other influences on assessment
 * provides experience to careers where peer judgement occurs || * time may have to be invested in teaching students to evaluate each other
 * instructor moderation is time consuming ||