Kristie,
If you have multiple *sections *in your course, yes, you do need to reach
consensus across sections.
But I am not clear why you would need consensus on how to do this
across *courses*? In most departments and universities, professors have
freedom to construct their own grading system for their various courses.
But that may be different in your situation.
Your comments about ensuring identical feedback and needing to grade the
quality of their feedback do not describe what I do.
I do set up a common structure for the feedback generated by peers
within a team and within the whole course. Everyone is given a form that
calls for two items: a number and a set of comments, for each of the other
members of the team.
There is, of course, some variation in the extent, depth, and
thoughtfulness of various comments. But that variation has not been a
problem. I do encourage them to *give* thoughtful and helpful comments to
others, even as they want to *receive *thoughtful and helpful comments.
Ultimately though, the function of the *comments *do not affect the grade;
they "simply" give feedback to the student as to the reason their peer
evaluation was high or low. It is the peer evaluation *scores *that they
get from the other members of their team, that goes into the calculation of
their grade.
I also compile the numbers and comments into a individual report that
goes back to each person in the team. If you have large numbers of
students, this could be generated by a computer.
You may want to read (or re-read) the webpage on "Peer Evaluation" on the
TBL website. Larry Michaelsen and I put together the document there,
called "Two Methods for Calculating Peer Evaluation Scores." Paul Koles
has some additional great suggestions on this webpage for structuring the
feedback that students create for each other.
Good luck with this, Dee
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 4:39 AM, Bridges, Kristie
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> I think this would be possible if it were a single course but we've not
> reached consensus on how to incorporate peer evaluation grades
> longitudinally across multiple courses. Even if we counted their
> evaluation scores toward a grade, I'm not sure it would address issues such
> as providing identical feedback to all team members. We would need to
> grade the quality of their feedback as well as the scores they receive from
> peers. Is that what you do?
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Dee Fink <[log in to unmask]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 1, 2014 5:36 PM
> *To:* Bridges, Kristie
> *Cc:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: Poor quality peer evaluation
>
> Kristie,
>
> Why don't you count the peer evaluations toward the course grade? Is
> there a reason for that?
> It seems like if you did, students would take them seriously.
>
> My view is/was that one of my learning goals was for students to learn
> how to work effectively as part of a group.
>
> - If that was a course learning goal, then I had to support that and
> assess that.
> - Peer evaluation is the primary way of assessing that.
> - And if I want students to take it seriously, I have to make it
> matter. And making it part of the course grade is my way of "making it
> matter."
>
> Dee Fink
>
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Bridges, Kristie <[log in to unmask]
> > wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>> We were wondering how others handle the issue of students who do not take
>> peer evaluation seriously. We currently use iPeer and the Koles method
>> but the results don’t count toward a grade. With 2 classes of 200 students
>> each and limited resources, it’s difficult to provide individual feedback
>> to students regarding the quality of their comments. Students who make
>> inappropriate comments are reported for lack of professionalism but this
>> happens very rarely. Much more common issues include students copying and
>> pasting identical feedback for multiple team members, using brief one-word
>> responses or stating in the self-evaluation that their own performance is
>> perfect. They’ve been addressed as a class regarding this and are given
>> examples of helpful/unhelpful responses but there currently are no
>> individual or team consequences. We’ve considered several options
>> including grading the responses (probably not viable for us at this time),
>> reporting all students whose responses don’t meet a minimum standard for
>> lack of professionalism or making the entire group re-do the evaluation if
>> any team member fails to take it seriously. We’d love to hear how the rest
>> of you handle this type of behavior. Many thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kristie Bridges
>>
>>
>>
>> Kristie Grove Bridges, PhD
>>
>> Associate Professor, Biomedical Sciences
>>
>> WVSOM
>>
>> 400 N Lee St
>>
>> Lewisburg, WV 24901
>>
>> 304-647-6223
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ***********************
> L. Dee Fink
> 234 Foreman Ave.
> Norman, OK 73069
> Phone/FAX: 405-364-6464
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Websites:
> www.designlearning.org [multiple resources on course design]
> www.deefinkandassociates.com [offer workshops & online courses]
> www.finkconsulting.info [Fink's consulting activities &
> publications]
>
> **Former President of the POD Network in Higher Education (2004-2005)
> **Author of: *Creating Significant Learning Experiences* (2003,
> Jossey-Bass)
> **Senior Associate, Dee Fink & Associates Consulting Services
>
>
>
--
***********************
L. Dee Fink
234 Foreman Ave.
Norman, OK 73069
Phone/FAX: 405-364-6464
Email: [log in to unmask]
Websites:
www.designlearning.org [multiple resources on course design]
www.deefinkandassociates.com [offer workshops & online courses]
www.finkconsulting.info [Fink's consulting activities &
publications]
**Former President of the POD Network in Higher Education (2004-2005)
**Author of: *Creating Significant Learning Experiences* (2003, Jossey-Bass)
**Senior Associate, Dee Fink & Associates Consulting Services
|
