Hi Folks,
I actually give students two interim teamwork
behavior (TWB) evaluations during the semester with no restrictions or
guidelines. If nothing else, these serve to remind them that 10% of their grade
depends on TWB. Even though they are typically very nice to each other on these
interim evaluations (i.e. high scores), when they complete the summative one
(done individually after they complete the final exam) the non-contributors
have faired poorly and lost letter grades. I do let them complete the interim
evaluations individually, but they know I will present them with the compiled
results, which makes them a bit cautious. They typically do not want to get a
team mate mad at them.
Harry Meeuwsen, UTEP
From: Team Learning
Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sweeney Fee, Sharon
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006
10:31 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Peer Evaluation
Implementation Question
I have used these twice with similar
effects, especially with nursing students who feel they must support each
other. If I do not use them, the response when I discuss the groups in my
introduction is the typical groan that not all do the same load. So, I explain
the evaluation to them as a tool to avoid such behavior. The students feel
satisfied with this and the groups, on majority, have worked well.
In reality, my points for the group
evaluation, as part of the total, will not impact most student’s grade in
a great way.
Sharon Sweeney Fee, RN, PhD
Assistant Professor
214 Sherrick Hall
406-994-2705
From: Team Learning
Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Smith, David W
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006
10:24 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Peer Evaluation
Implementation Question
I rarely use peer
evaluations any more, so take what I offer with a grain of salt.
My scoring essentially did what Jim Sibley
suggests.
I put limits on the number of peers who
could be rated in the top category. After all, if everyone is
contributing reasonably well, there isn't much room for several people to be
outstanding. In a good group you expect similar contributions and similar
ratings over the long haul.
Some of my groups
figured out they could rotate the top category among all the
members over the semester. A group that can figure out how to work in harmony
on their peer evaluations and stick to their agreement all semester has done
something well. If their reports or assignments are working out well, then they
are achieving the substantive goals of the group.
Try giving some explicit guidelines for
ratings, eg, "did not participate in the discussion." If you
do, then everyone in the group will actually speak up, or their group will ask
them to. Otherwise, they can't legitimately hold to their agreement to
fix the ratings. This will legitimately give everyone in the group a similar
rating.
Watch carefully for someone who is doing
noticeably worse than their group on exams and other evaluations. They
might be letting the rest of the group do all the work. You can suggest
privately that they are passing up an opportunity to learn by not contributing
in a meaningful way. Correspondingly, someone who has much better
individual RAT scores than the group score is either not contributing or is not
being listened to by the group and the group may need to be told.
Finally, there shouldn't be much point in
worrying about it a great deal. Let them have the points and move on. Use
this information as a diagnostic, of group effectiveness. If a group can
conspire to game your system, then they are working well on something.
Regards,
David Smith
David W. Smith, Ph.D., M.P.H., C.Stat.
Associate Professor, Biostatistics
Fellow, Institute for Health Policy
The
San Antonio Branch Campus
voice: (210) 562-5512
e-mail: [log in to unmask]