I'm not sure I agree with the assertion that this rating was "unfair".
Yes she may have scored higher than the others but what was her
interaction with the other team members like? How well did she listen
share discuss and compromise? Also her rating is just 2 pints below
average (assuming that the five member distributed the points evenly
she would have gotten 100 points). Just because someone else was rated
higher doesn't necessarily mean that some less than above board was
going on.
I personally dropped the point distribution for a weighted rubric
model. Students award 0,1,2 or 3 points on 9 different items (how
well he/she did on the iRAT, how well did s/he prepare by doing the
readings, how well did s/he listen to others, etc). Then they can
give one team member a 1, 2, or 3 point bonus if they wish. Finally
the submitter is graded on how helpful their answers are to he
questions what was the most valuable contribution this member made;
and what is one things this member could do to improve?
This goes a long way to having the students make thoughtful ratings
and gives me and explanation when a student is concerned about their
rating.
Good luck with your situation.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 3:48 AM, J.Aires de Sousa <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear TBLers
>
> I'm using TBL in a large course of General Chemistry (1st year undergraduate
> students of Engineering) with 450 students in classes of ca 80 students.
>
> I have a problem with the peer evaluation in one team, and I'd like to get
> suggestions before I make a decision.
>
> This is a team of 6 members in which one of the students contributed
> mostly(apparently to me). This conclusion is confirmed by the marks obtained
> in the final exams (she scored 4 points above the other team members in a
> 0-20 scale). Peer evaluation was performed before the scores of the final
> exams were known. Students distributed the 100 points by the other team
> members and submitted the evaluations directly to me. Only the final sums
> were released. Probably due to conflicts within the team, this student ended
> up with 98 points and two of the others got above 110. She is complaining
> the evaluation was clearly unfair, and I'm inclined to agree.
>
> I'm considering several options:
>
> - Do nothing
> - Ask the team if everyone feels comfortable with the final sums and, if
> not, repeat the evaluation
> - Repeat the evaluation, this time openly
>
> I'm sure this should happen frequently in TBL. I had a similar problem
> before, but more evident, with a rather small team (4 members). At that time
> I "vetoed" the result and repeated the evaluation.
>
> It would be great if someone could help.
>
> Thanks,
> Joao
>
> --
> Joao Aires de Sousa
> Departamento de Quimica, Faculdade de Ciencias e Tecnologia,
> Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal
> Tel: (+351) 21 2948300 x 10907 Fax: (+351) 21 2948550
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> www: http://joao.airesdesousa.com
--
Herb Coleman, Ph.D
Dir. Instructional Computing and Technology
Adjunct Professor of Psychology
Austin Community College
Highland Business Center
5930 Middle Fiskville Rd.
Austin, TX 78752
[log in to unmask]
512-223-7746
*************************************************
Don't Think Small
"Arthur: It would have to be a 747.
Cobb: Why is that?
Arthur: Because on a 747 the pilot is up top, and the first
class cabin is in the nose, so no one would walk through. But you'd have
to buy out the entire cabin. And the first class flight attendant.
Saito: I bought the airline.....It seemed neater."
From the motion picture Inception
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAm_Cp3OKik
*************************************************
|
