Groupwork and formative assessment

1
Groupwork and formative assessment

• Mark Freeman

2
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

3
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

4
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

5
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

6
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

7
Easy wins that promote feedback

• Quick wins
• Submission of individual (not marked) concept map
  before teams formed
• Permanent teams across semester gt1 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

8
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

9
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 academics team assessment mark (eg.
  SPARK)
• simply formative
• Followed by in-class feedback sessions

10
How does SPARK work?
Rating scale 0 no contribution
1 less than
team average
2 contribution per team average 3
above team average
11
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
12
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

13
Worthwhile win 3 Team-based learning
Prepare
Indiv quiz
Team quiz
Contingent teaching
Team problem
Class discuss
Discuss self/peer feedback
Rate self/peers
14
Traditional
Team-based
Readings
In Class
Out of Class
Convey Course Concepts
ReadinessAssessment
Lecture
Apply Course Concepts
In Class
Out of Class
15
Holistic Team-Based Learning

• Michaelsen et al (2002) www.teambasedlearning.or
  g
• 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

16
Student perceptions survey
17
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

18
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

19
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

20
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.335, 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/o
  urwork/tla/employability_enterprise/web0304_studen
  t_employability_profile_business_management_accoun
  tancy.pdf
• http//www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/gradquals/
• http//www.unisanet.unisa.edu.au/gradquals/staff/p
  rogram/assessment-table.pdf
• http//ipeer.apsc.ubc.ca/wiki/index.php/IPeer
• http//teaching.econ.usyd.edu.au/groupwork/

21
Thank you .

• QA

22
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 makes results of student thinking highly
  visible
• opportunity to discuss contrasts in reasoning
• Significant Learning
• authentic, interesting, real world application
• impossible to complete as individual

23
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

24
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)