1) I think it's important to create conditions in which it is hard for bullying to occur (e.g. having the evaluations done during the final or on-line)
2) Making it clear to everyone that the peer evaluations only differentiate WITHIN (but NOT between) teams. Thus, if everyone in the team gets the same score, the member(s) who contributed least are likely to end up with the same grade as the member(s) who contributed most.
As long as those two things are in place, I'm neither surprised or troubled when there isn't much difference in member scores--especially in the better teams.
Larry K. Michaelsen
Professor of Management
Central Missouri State University
Dockery 400G
Warrensburg, MO 64093
660/543-4124 voice
660/543-8465 fax
>>>Marie Thomas <
[log in to unmask]> 12/17/05 11:28 am >>>
I think it's not necessarily a bad thing when team members figure out
how to award peer evaluations that result in everyone getting the same
score. In my experience, teams that do this are the better-functioning
groups, as seems to also be Maureen Jonason's experience. Even figuring
out how to accomplish equal peer ratings requires teamwork! While
everyone in a team may not make the same contribution, members of
well-functioning teams may feel that everyone makes an equivalent
contribution and, therefore, should be rewarded equally. In teams where
there are big differences in contributions, I've seen big differences in
peer ratings.
While I'm aware that there is a possibility that some team members might
"bully" others into producing equal ratings, I've never seen this happen
in practice.
Marie Thomas
Marie D. Thomas, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
California State University San Marcos
San Marcos, CA 92096
760-750-4157 (office)
760-750-3418 (fax)
[log in to unmask]!DSPAM:1576,43a44e24195451236837510!