Hi Sandy,
 
I think the peer eval process is crucial, but I certainly understand its difficulties! 
 
I may have posted this to the list before, but just in case, here's what we've done to maximize the benefit and minimize the head-ache of the peer eval process.
 
 
HERE'S THE GOLDEN PART:
 
When explaining how TBL works in the first week of class, we say something like this:
 
"At the end of the semester, there is always a long line of students outside my door.  These are folks who are just a few points shy of the-next-grade-up (e.g., from a B+ to an A-) and they always ask if there is any extra credit they can do to get that bump.  At that point in the semester, the answer is no, BUT I will look at the requests and appreciations your team-mates made across the semester.  If they were all good or started out rough but got better and you really are just a few point shy of a bump, then yes--it looks good for you to get the bump.  But if the requests and appreciations reflect that you weren't coming prepared, or weren't working well with your team-mates, then no dice."
 
The great thing about this is that no students know until very late in the semester if this might apply to them, so it motivates good behavior all term long.
 
I realize this might not work in all cases, but it is simple, easy-to-explain, and math-free for us, while still giving students the feedback they need for good group process and motivating good team-work at the individual level.
 
Hope this helps.  And, if I said all this before, apologies for repetition.  Just wanting to help! :-)
 
-Michael
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Team Learning Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sandy Cook
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 6:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Peer Evaluations

There was a great thread about Peer evaluation in January, which was informative, but truthfully, I did not appreciate the discussion at the time. 

 

We have just completed our first peer evaluation process and I have some questions.  We believe in the peer evaluation process and will not abandon it, but there have been some issues.

 

In the TBL book there are two forms of peer evaluation described (percentage and maintenance).  Several pros and cons are listed, but mostly ending with a suggestion of a positive learning note.  Of the two methods described, selfishly I chose the percentage one because it made more sense to me and was easier to calculate.  The students however, are incensed (well maybe too strong of a word, but upset) that it is a zero-sum game.  They don't mind giving points to those who contribute, but they do not want to take points away from those who contribute less. 

·         How do you rationalize the zero-sum concept? 

·         How does one explain the value of moderating the scores?  Maybe it is a cultural thing - being nice, but the idea of taking away something they believe they have earned is painful. How do you tell them that they have not really earned the group scores unless they participate in the group?

·         When the group size results in a proportion that is not easily divisible by 5 – and they want to give the team equal marks – but can’t.  For example a team of 7, with 6 ratings can only give 16.7 and 16.6 – someone will be a bit higher and a bit lower.

 

Using the maintenance method might solve the logical problem by making the peer assessment an added component to the grade - not subtractive (on the surface).   If I were to switch to that method,

·         How do you decide what % of the final grade should the peer assessment be?

·         Is it really any difference – or does it just appear that way to the students because they see it as adding not subtracting?

·         How do faculty feel about inflating grades by making portion of success be solely on peer points?

·         Will I exchange a student fight for a faculty one?

 

This is quite a contentious topic, and I can see why people give up on it – or move away to more feedback rather than grade moderation – but we really feel that it is important to keep – so any advice on how to deal with student’s anxiety is most welcomed.

 

Sandy

 

 

 

***************************************

 

Sandy COOK, PhD | Associate Dean, Curriculum Development | Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School Singapore | W: (65) 6516 8722| F: (65) 6227 2698 |