Grading Methods for Group Work
Instructor Assessment of Group Product
Assessment Option
|
Advantages
|
Disadvantages
|
Shared Group Grade
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
- 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
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
- stronger students may be unfairly disadvantaged by weaker ones and vice versa
|
Individual Grade - Allocated task
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
- 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
Each student writes and submits an individual report based on the group's work on the task/project
|
- ensures individual effort
- 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
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
- 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
Assessment Option
|
Advantages
|
Disadvantages
|
Student distribution of pool of marks
Instructor awards a set number of scores and let the group decide how to distribute them.
Example: 4 member group
- 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
Instructor gives shared group grade & individual grade adjusted according to a peer assessment factor.
Example
- 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
|
As Above
|
As Above
|
Peer Evaluation - random marker, using criteria, moderated
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
- 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
|
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
CONTACT US to talk with an Eberly colleague in person!