Have you ever had problems with having the students discuss these
evaluations face-to-face? That is, I'm imagining a situation where one
team member feels differently than everyone else and either doesn't
want to speak up (like with a very shy student) or the team discussion
turns into more of an argument than a productive discussion (like with
a very immature student.
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Laura Madson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Good morning everyone -
> May I throw an idea into our collective hat and see what you think?
>
> I've tried various approaches to peer evaluation (e.g., iPeer, paper, one
> global peer evaluation at the end of the term, peer evaluations after each
> big team activity) but I was never satisfied that it was as effective as it
> could be. My hope was that using evaluations after each big team activity
> (i.e., 4 or 5 times during the semester) would both hold students
> accountable to their teams and help students refine their behavior to be
> more effective in the team. Instead, students seemed unwilling to change
> their behavior.
>
> These days, I'm using the attached activity to help teams discuss and
> process their interactions. Teams complete it in-class immediately following
> each big team activity (there are 5 during the term), before they receive
> feedback on the team product they submitted. I've only used it for one full
> semester but it seemed to be more successful at getting students to
> explicitly discuss their team interactions than anything else I've tried.
> There's also the possibility that completing the processing activity will
> put ideas in students' heads about specific things they could do differently
> to improve their team interactions. The end-of-the-semester peer evaluation
> (also attached) is very similar to the team processing activity so the
> end-of-semester peer evaluation includes the same dimensions they've been
> discussing during the term.
>
> I welcome all suggestions and feedback!
> Thank you!
> lm
>
> Laura Madson, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor
> Department of Psychology
> New Mexico State University
> Las Cruces, NM 88003
> [log in to unmask]
> (575) 646-6207
>
>
> On Feb 7, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Bridges, Kristie wrote:
>
>> Thanks! We've considered approaches such as these but with a class of 200
>> students I'm afraid it will be overwhelming and error-prone.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>> Behalf Of Jennifer Imazeki
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 11:16 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: electronic peer evaluation
>>
>> I use the quiz tool in Blackboard and that generates a spreadsheet similar
>> to what you'd get with a Google Docs form. However, I still have to do a lot
>> of manipulation to that spreadsheet once I've got all the information. The
>> way I set up the survey in BB is to ask each student to give the name of a
>> teammate, give that teammate's score, and then write a qualitative
>> evaluation so each of those responses is a separate column in the resulting
>> spreadsheet. What creates the headache for me is that students don't enter
>> their teammates in the same order so I have to do a lot of cutting and
>> pasting to gather together all the scores and comments for a given student.
>> Since I have more students than Herb (two classes each with 12-13 teams of
>> 5-6 students), it can be quite time-consuming. Some of the web-based tools
>> look quite useful but I really don't want to make my students create yet
>> another account for an external service so I'd be particularly interested if
>> anyone either has an ea
>> sier way
>>
>> Jennifer
>> ****************************
>> Jennifer Imazeki
>> Department of Economics
>> San Diego State University
>> homepage: http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~jimazeki/
>> Economics for Teachers blog: http://economicsforteachers.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 7:57 AM, Herbert Coleman <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>> I don't have "large" numbers (only 6 groups of 5-6 students) but, I
>>> use a Google docs form for students to enter their peer evaluations.
>>> I like it because,... well, I love spreadsheets (so now you know) and
>>> the data is automatically entered and ready for me to manipulate. I
>>> can also quickly see who has submitted their review and who is
>>> lacking. I can tabulate the results and apply the grade weight. I
>>> can also capture the comments to share with the student when needed.
>>> Students are give time in class to go to the lab or library to
>>> complete the assignment or they can do it at home.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Bridges, Kristie
>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>> Has anyone used iPeer, SparkPlus or other program for peer evaluation
>>>> with a large number of students/groups ? If so, what were the pros
>>>> and cons? Any recommendations for web-based peer evaluation tools
>>>> would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kristie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kristie Grove Bridges, PhD
>>>>
>>>> Associate Professor, Biochemistry
>>>>
>>>> WVSOM
>>>>
>>>> 400 N Lee St
>>>>
>>>> Lewisburg, WV 24901
>>>>
>>>> 304-647-6223
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>> *************************************************
>>
>
|
