Assessment of Group Work University of Warwick 2728 March 2003

1
Assessment of Group Work University of
Warwick27/28 March 2003

• Cordelia Bryan
• Project Director

2

• Three year HEFCE-funded project
• Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning

3
Performing Arts

• Drama
• Movement
• Music

4
Consortium members

• Central School of Speech and Drama (lead)
• Dartington College of Arts
• Goldsmiths College
• University of Leeds
• University of Salford
• University of Ulster

5
Three phases

• Research successful practice in diverse contexts
• Develop and trial methods and materials
• Disseminate resources based on the above

6

• What makes the assessment of group work
  problematic?
• What are collaborative skills and how can they be
  developed and assessed?
• How might we build on successful practice to make
  this area more transparent and accessible to
  staff and students?

7
Themes researched

• The assessment of process
• Assessing interdisciplinary collaboration

8
Themes researched

• Developing assessing effective groups
• The significance of group formation
• Language values in assessment

9
Methods explored developed

• Peer and self assessment
• How to give and receive feedback
• Guided reflection (a holistic approach)
• Teaching basic group dynamics (diverse
  approaches)
• Recognising and working with diversity

10
What do we mean by peer assessment?

• Peer tutoring / mentoring
• Peer feedback (written oral)
• Peer grading
• Tutor modified peer grading

11
A constructivist pedagogic view of peer assessment

• To enhance learning (for assessor and assessed)
• To encourage student autonomy
• To develop critical judgement
• Brown Glasner (1999)

12
By judging others, students gain

• insight into their own performance
• a sense of ownership of the assessment process
• skills to evaluate their own and their peers
  achievements realistically (lifelong learning)

13
PA works best when

• Clear criteria are used
• Well designed appropriate assessment tasks are
  used
• Assessment matches learning objectives

14
PA works best when

• Students engage in the process of devising their
  own assessment criteria
• Criteria are introduced from day one so that a
  shared understanding can develop
• Staff are fully committed

15
PA works best when students are taught

• Appropriate language
• How to give and receive effective feedback
• (guidelines available on AGP website)
• And they need practice

16
What potential problems are there for involving
students in the assessment process?

• In pairs or groups of 3 or 4, discuss what you
  think these might be and list them.

17
Potential problems

• Reluctance to participate in process
• General dislike of assessing/judging friends
• Character conflicts
• Time consuming
• Lack of evaluative skills
• Lack of accuracy of peer grading
• Legal issues relating to degree classification

18
Potential benefits

• In pairs or small groups, discuss and list the
  potential benefits of involving students in the
  assessment process.

19
Potential benefits for students

• Improves student learning assessment
• Increases understanding of process and product
• Increases student autonomy
• Improves key skills development (critical
  thinking communication self motivation time
  management etc.)

20
Potential benefits for staff

• In small groups, list the potential benefits to
  staff of involving students in their own and
  their peers assessment.

21
Potential benefits for staff

• Increases staff reflection on teaching /
  assessment relationship
• Enables more productive tutorials
• Can create collaborative and exciting atmosphere
• Can assist in response to increased burden of
  marking

22
Peer oral assessment at APU

• Each student completes assessment sheet comments
  for each of his/her group
• Criteria with suggested headings
• Content
• Organisation of material
• Delivery

23
Peer oral assessment at APU

• Student suggests total class-mark (0-39 fail)
  40-49 third) etc..
• Tutor uses groups comments and class mark to
  arrive at final mark

24
CONCLUSION

• Contextualise
• Negotiate / review
• Focus on learning
• Small quick wins
• Not everywhere (mix match)

25
CONCLUSION

• Build on success
• Use students (vertically horizontally)
• Identify and secure friends / champions of
  change (internal external)
• ILTHE LTSN SEDA
• HAN FDTL

26
Leading Practice in the Performing Arts

• Two one-day conferences on Learning Teaching in
  HE
• Monday 23 June 2003 at Rose Bruford College,
  Sidcup
• Wednesday 25 June 2003 at Liverpool Insitute for
  the Performing Arts (LIPA)