Grading Rubric for a Group Project in Information Systems
Name: Jeria Quesenberry
Scope: Course – 67250 Information Systems Milieux, Information Systems Program, H&SS
Assessment Tool: Grading Rubric for a Group Project
What factors/data/circumstances initiated the action?
When I previously employed my group project I had difficulties evaluating the projects. It was difficult to distinguish between sophisticated, competent and incomplete projects.
What did you hope to learn from the assessment?
The main goal was to clarify my expectations of student performance and to develop a framework for subsequent grading of the projects. I wanted to provide detailed feedback to the students about the strengths of their projects and identify areas for improvement.
How was the data collected?
The data is comprised of five elements: a group project proposal, a systems analysis and design deliverable, an application demonstration, a presentation and an individual reflection essay. A rubric was developed for the group project to provide clear expectations to students and to help provide better quality feedback.
How was the assessment activity carried out?
Who were the participants?
Students in all section of the 67-250 Information Systems Milieux course offered in the fall of 2008. There are 65 students in the course, the majority of who are Information Systems majors at the sophomore level.
When was/will the data be collected?
The data was collected in the spring of 2008 and will be collected in the fall of 2008. These elements are collected throughout the semester of the course.
What is the current status?
The current status is ongoing. I implemented the original assessment tool in the spring of 2008 and I am currently implementing the revised assessment tool in the fall of 2008. I intend to implement revised versions of the assessment tool going forward.
What was the data, how was it analyzed/interpreted?
The group projects were scored by the instructor using the assessment rubric.
How is the data being used?
Using the assessment tool had a significant impact on my evaluation of student performance. Prior to using the tool, I struggled with providing detailed feedback to students. Further, when I evaluated the projects I realized that the students did (or did not) include many of the components I expected them to analyze. I currently include the assessment rubric in the group project description in order to clarify my expectations and to help the students recognize what components are important to include (or not include).
For example, with the group project, one of my main priorities is for the students to work well in their teams and build fundamental teamwork skills. In the initial version of the group project description I did not detail this as a major component or include it in my rubric. Hence, when I evaluated the projects it was difficult to assess teamwork skills. In the revised version of the group project description and in the assessment rubric these skills are identified as priorities. Likewise, the discrimination between sophisticated and competent levels of teamwork is clear.
I have also found that the assessment tool allows me to more quickly and concisely evaluate the projects and provide timely feedback to the students.
In general creating the assessment tool was tedious and somewhat time consuming, but well worth the effort. Taking the time early on to think critically about the assessment tool is really paying off in the end. I am able to be more productive with the evaluation of the projects and provide detailed feedback to the students. The students also appreciate knowing my evaluation criteria before their projects are due. Furthermore, I have learned that the group project description and the assessment tool are dynamic documents. My intent is to refine and update them as necessary going forward.
CONTACT US to talk with an Eberly colleague in person!