Hi Jorden,
I also set the average (10) to a set value, however, I usually use 90%. That way, an average team evaluation does not bring down the score of a student who otherwise has scores corresponding to an "A." However, it can't bring a student's B scores up to an A. I once had a class that voted the highest percentage possible for team evaluations (I had capped it at 30%) and counted on getting the full 30% based on 10's on evaluations - they were quite irate when they learned of the 90% scaling. That was the first and last semester I used the class-chosen scaling (it seems many others have omitted this also, based on messages in this email list serve); prior to and since then I set the team evaluation to about 10%, and explain an average evaluation does not receive the maximum score. At the end of a semester, I often consider adopting the multiplier method, because my current approach doesn't have much power to reward those that contribute more or punish (demerit?) those who don't.

I think it's important to note that the grading environment at OSU that Michaelson was working under required him to grade on a relative scale (e.g., the top 10% of the class get A's, 2nd 10% B's, etc.). I don't know if this is in the book, but I recall him saying this at the TBL workshop at Clemson (held several years ago now). Therefore, in his system, the absolute scores didn't matter as much as with an absolute grading scale.

Good luck!
Beth

At 11:11 AM 3/11/2008, Sibley, Jim wrote:

Hi Jorden

I usually tell me students that average is some fixed percentage (usually 80%) so if student try to game the system and give each other 10's they can only get 80% of the peer eval grade

I also have a number of instructors I work with that use the peer eval score as a multiplier with the team product grade.....this way average means you get the team earned grade....i.e. 75% times peer eval score 10 out of average 10 then you get 75%

There has been some concerned expressed by students on whether a bad member is good for the team allowing the other students to share more points.

Jim

From: Team Learning Discussion List [ mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jorden C. Sahl
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 7:32 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: the math of peer evals

Hi Everyone,
I recently finished my second Introductory Psychology course using TBL. I have a question that is not that complicated but for some reason I can’t get myself around the math and I want to double check with other TBL users before I teach it again.

I used the Peer Evaluation form from the TBL book that assigns an average of 10 points, with one 9 and at least one 11 (max 15). A student asked me – so what does my average have to be to get “perfect” on the peer evaluations? And I was stumped (I had just never thought of it that way)

The max anyone can get would be 15, so I would assume in the rare case scenario of one person getting all 15s from their peers that would be “perfect”. But then, if 10 is average, is 10 “perfect” (I.e., if someone gets an average of 10, do they get 100% on peer evaluations, with the possibility for students to get higher than 100%)? (My class picked 30% for the peer evaluations grade weight). Calculating it this way (10 is 100%) increases everyone’s grade quite a bit (about half a letter grade), which I don’t have a problem with, as long as it is correct!

I am second guessing myself with the math and want some input before I use this method again.
Thanks so much.

Jorden Cummings Sahl, M.A.

Graduate Student, Clinical Psychology

Depression & Wellness Research Lab (302.831.2215)

University of Delaware

Newark, DE 19716

[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Elizabeth R. Carraway, PhD
Associate Professor
[log in to unmask]
Dept. Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences
Clemson University
342 Computer Court
Anderson, SC 29625
www.ces.clemson.edu/eees
Office: 864-656-5574
Fax: 864-656-0672
Pendleton office (Clemson Institute of Environmental Toxicology):
Office: 864-646-2189
Fax: 864-646-2277
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~