groupwork and formative assessment l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Groupwork and formative assessment PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Groupwork and formative assessment

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 24

Groupwork and formative assessment - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 247 Views
  • Uploaded on

Groupwork and formative assessment Mark Freeman Outline Aims & rationale Literature review Process Easy & (almost) effortless wins Worthwhile wins In/Out-of-class decision based assessments Self & peer feedback Holistic in-class ‘team-based learning’ Conclusions Q & A

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Groupwork and formative assessment' - Ava


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
outline
Outline
  • Aims & rationale
  • Literature review
  • Process
  • Easy & (almost) effortless wins
  • Worthwhile wins
    • In/Out-of-class decision based assessments
    • Self & peer feedback
    • Holistic in-class ‘team-based learning’
  • Conclusions
  • Q & A
aims rationale
Aims & rationale

Aims

  • To identify how groupwork can foster learning and valuable graduate qualities …..…efficiently

Rationale

  • Valuable GQ eg. ACCI (02); AIG(06); UniSA (07)
  • But not hitting mark
    • Sweet & Michaelsen (2006) Lisk (2003)
    • Volet (1998)
    • BCA (2006)
    • UniSA (2006)
  • Education is not providing increasingly vital skills to make innovation thrive.
  • “Management education was focussed on finance and marketing but was not providing graduates with the ‘soft’ skills such as teamwork, that enabled innovative use of these capabilities”
literature review
Literature review

Models

  • Deep approaches desirable (Trigwell & Prosser, 1999)
  • Social constructivism (Rust et al, 2003; Bandura, 1997)
  • Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, Mourning (Tuckman, 1965, 2001). Whelan (2004) has similar where trust is crucial

New groups differ to LT developed groups (Birmingham 04)

  • Less trust in & attraction to group
  • Little identification with group or its goals
  • Perceptions of others stereotyped
  • Decisions socially (not task) focussed
  • Less willing to disagree
  • Face-saving conflict resolution (eg. voting not reasoned consensus)
  • Less able to complete difficult intellectual tasks
getting the most out of groupwork
Getting the most out of groupwork
  • What?
  • Product
  • analyse case • report as consultant
  • produce wiki • present orally/online
  • debate online • reflect journal/online
  • develop solution
  • Decision
  • decide optimal business (simulation) inputs
  • decide best outcome of application exercise
  • choose best MCQ quiz option
  • rate peers’ presentation
  • Why?
  • Where?
  • What?
  • How?
  • Preparing
  • Forming
  • Managing
  • Formative
  • Summative
not hands off management
Not ‘hands off’ management

Preparing

  • Focus on peer learning not avoiding free riding
  • Value diversity (Baron, 2006)
  • Explain how to give/receive feedback & why
  • Engage team building exercises

Forming

  • Teacher random/ability
  • Students with/out criteria

Managing

  • Support thru stages (forming, storming, norming etc)
  • Who? Teacher, peers, self or all
easy wins that promote feedback
Easy wins that promote feedback

Quick wins

  • Submission of individual (not marked) concept map before teams formed
  • Permanent teams across semester & >1 assessments
  • In-class same team quiz after individual quiz (both assessable) & auto marked later by scanner

(Almost) effortless wins

  • In-class same team quiz after individual quiz (both assessed) facilitated by IFAT forms or clickers
  • In-class team application exercise with simultaneous decision and reporting with reasons marked
  • Peer assessment of group products by peer groups facilitated by paper rubric or clickers
worthwhile win 1 in out of class
Worthwhile win 1: In/Out-of-class
  • Multi-cycle technology-supported business simulation that require regular decision inputs that are interdependent eg
    • SmartSims http://www.smartsims.com/
    • CapSim http://www.capsim.com/
  • Integrated business experience (Oklahoma Uni)
    • Capstone unit: run real business over one semester
    • Teams plan, fund, implement business idea
    • Local angel funding
worthwhile win 2 self peer feedback
Worthwhile win 2: Self/peer feedback
  • Self then peer evaluation
  • Judgment
    • Holistic
    • Criteria (NB. Student developed)
  • Enabling technology
    • in-class on paper
    • online
  • Applied
    • peer review as total assessment (eg. CPR)
    • additional assessment component to academic (eg. iPeer)
    • moderating academic’s team assessment mark (eg. SPARK)
    • simply formative
  • Followed by in-class feedback sessions
how does spark work
How does SPARK work?

Rating scale: 0 = no contribution 1 = less than team average

2 = contribution per team average 3 = above team average

how will spark affect marks

Aggregate factors produced by SPARK system

SAPA factor 1.1 indicates overrate own contribution to team by 110%

SPA factor

Team A: 12/20

12 x 1.0 = 12

Team C: 15/20

Team B: 12/20

15 x 0.9 = 13.5

15 x 1.25 = 18.8

12 x 0.9 = 10.8

12 x 1.25 = 15.0

15 x 0.75 = 11.3

15 x 1.16 = 17.4

12 x 1.16 = 13.9

12 x 0.75 = 9.0

How will SPARK affect marks?
in class reflective feedback sessions
In-class reflective feedback sessions
  • Reflect on team performance and dynamics
  • Reflect on aggregate self & peer ratings
  • Reveal own shortcomings
  • Express positive contributions of others
  • Focus on improving collaboration not avoiding free-riding and provide gentle suggestions to peers
  • Consider response to scenarios
worthwhile win 3 team based learning

Pre-class

Pre-class

In-class

In-class

5 per course

1 or 2 per course

Worthwhile win 3: Team-based learning

Prepare

Indiv quiz

Team quiz

Contingent teaching

Team problem

Discuss self/peer feedback

Class discuss

Rate self/peers

slide14

Team-based

Traditional

Out of Class

In Class

Readings

Convey Course Concepts

ReadinessAssessment

Lecture

Apply Course Concepts

In Class

Out of Class

holistic team based learning
Holistic “Team-Based Learning”
  • Michaelsen et al (2002) & www.teambasedlearning.org
  • Students (eg. Levine et al, 04)
    • Actively engaged applying not passively listening
    • Challenges previous groupwork prejudices
    • Develops collaboration and communication skills
    • Obvious fun and hum
    • Achievement and learning (& in national exams)
  • Staff (eg. Thompson et al; 07)
    • Transformation of class time
    • Job satisfaction
    • Initial cost and risk of adopting – but can adopt incrementally
conclusion 1 team formation
Conclusion 1: Team formation

Process

  • Distribute diverse skills & abilities
  • Transparently form eg. in-class
  • Separate subgroups
  • Keep largish (5 to 7 members)

Scope

  • Permanent over semester
  • Permanent across multiple assessments
  • Have some, preferably lots, of in-class time
  • Primarily for making decisions
conclusion 2 teams work on decisions
Conclusion 2: Teams work on DECISIONS

Decisions eg. in TBL

  • Negotiating assessment weights of indiv/team quiz
  • MCQ individual quiz
  • MCQ team quiz
  • Team application problem
  • Rating self and peer contributions

Benefits

  • Promote learning of essential concepts or skills
  • Encourages application
  • Builds team cohesiveness
  • Ensures individual accountability
  • Develops critical evaluation
  • Highlights the positive value of groups
conclusion 3 support feedback loop
Conclusion 3: Support feedback loop

Why? Marks + learning (ie. formative + summative)

When? Regularly and immediately if possible

How? Technology can be efficient & accurate

  • Scanners/clickers (for in class individual quizzes)
  • IFAT forms (for in-class team quiz)
  • Coloured cards (for in-class team problems)
  • Self and peer evaluation system (online or paper rubric)

Peer feedback is very powerful

  • During completion of immediate feedback team quiz
  • Arguing through the team application problems
  • Multiple structured in-class formative feedback opportunities using peer ratings
references
References

Papers and books

  • Epstein, M.L., Epstein, B.B., & Brosvic, G.M. (2001). Immediate feedback during academic testing. Psychological Reports. 88, 889-894.
  • Freeman M, McKenzie J. (2002) ‘SPARK: A Confidential Web-Based Template for Self and Peer Assessment of Student Teamwork: Benefits of Evaluating Across Different Subjects', British Journal of Educational Technology, vol.33:5, pp. 551 - 569.
  • Michaelsen, L.K., Knight, A.B & Fink, L.D. (2004) Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups in College Teaching. Stylus Publishing, Sterling VA
  • Pelaez, N., (2002) “Problem-Based Writing with Peer Review Improves Academic Performance in Physiology,” Advances in Physiology Education, 26, pp174-184.
  • Race, P., (2000) 500 Tips on Group Learning. Routledge, London.

Good websites

  • http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/tla/employability_enterprise/web0304_student_employability_profile_business_management_accountancy.pdf
  • http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/gradquals/
  • http://www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/gradquals/staff/program/assessment-table.pdf
  • http://ipeer.apsc.ubc.ca/wiki/index.php/IPeer
  • http://teaching.econ.usyd.edu.au/groupwork/
team application problems
Team application problems
  • Same Problem
    • so whole class applying minds first in teams
    • later whole class discussing finer points
  • Specific Choice
    • time on team decision not spent developing a product
    • impossible to complete without using course concepts
  • Simultaneous Report
    • decision makesresults of student thinking highly visible
    • opportunity to discuss contrasts in reasoning
  • Significant Learning
    • authentic, interesting, real world application
    • impossible to complete as individual
why teamwork
Why teamwork?

Australian Chamber of Commerce & Industry (2002)

  • Communication: productive & harmonious relations
  • Team work: productive relationships & outcomes
  • Problem-solving: productive outcomes

Australian Industry Group’ (2006)

  • Want “people who are flexible and adaptive, willing to learn on the job, team workers, technically competent and committed to excellence”.

Business Council of Australia (2006)

  • Education not providing increasingly vital skills to make innovation thrive
  • “Management education was focussed on finance and marketing but was not providing graduates with the ‘soft’ skills such as teamwork, that enabled innovative use of these capabilities”
gq4 work collaboratively as a professional
GQ4: work collaboratively as a professional
  • use logical and rational argument to persuade others, to negotiate with others
  • work collaboratively with different groups, identify the needs of others and build positive relationships
  • provide leadership within a team context by understanding responsibilities for organisation, planning, influencing and negotiating
  • work in a team (cooperate with all team members, share ideas, forgo personal recognition, negotiate solutions when opinions differ, resolve conflict, recognise strengths of other team members, share responsibility, convey a shared vision for the team, display a commitment to make the team function effectively)