Have you ever had problems with having the students discuss these evaluations face-to-face? That is, I'm imagining a situation where one team member feels differently than everyone else and either doesn't want to speak up (like with a very shy student) or the team discussion turns into more of an argument than a productive discussion (like with a very immature student. On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Laura Madson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Good morning everyone - > May I throw an idea into our collective hat and see what you think? > > I've tried various approaches to peer evaluation (e.g., iPeer, paper, one > global peer evaluation at the end of the term, peer evaluations after each > big team activity) but I was never satisfied that it was as effective as it > could be. My hope was that using evaluations after each big team activity > (i.e., 4 or 5 times during the semester) would both hold students > accountable to their teams and help students refine their behavior to be > more effective in the team. Instead, students seemed unwilling to change > their behavior. > > These days, I'm using the attached activity to help teams discuss and > process their interactions. Teams complete it in-class immediately following > each big team activity (there are 5 during the term), before they receive > feedback on the team product they submitted. I've only used it for one full > semester but it seemed to be more successful at getting students to > explicitly discuss their team interactions than anything else I've tried. > There's also the possibility that completing the processing activity will > put ideas in students' heads about specific things they could do differently > to improve their team interactions. The end-of-the-semester peer evaluation > (also attached) is very similar to the team processing activity so the > end-of-semester peer evaluation includes the same dimensions they've been > discussing during the term. > > I welcome all suggestions and feedback! > Thank you! > lm > > Laura Madson, Ph.D. > Associate Professor > Department of Psychology > New Mexico State University > Las Cruces, NM 88003 > [log in to unmask] > (575) 646-6207 > > > On Feb 7, 2012, at 9:19 AM, Bridges, Kristie wrote: > >> Thanks! We've considered approaches such as these but with a class of 200 >> students I'm afraid it will be overwhelming and error-prone. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On >> Behalf Of Jennifer Imazeki >> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 11:16 AM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: electronic peer evaluation >> >> I use the quiz tool in Blackboard and that generates a spreadsheet similar >> to what you'd get with a Google Docs form. However, I still have to do a lot >> of manipulation to that spreadsheet once I've got all the information. The >> way I set up the survey in BB is to ask each student to give the name of a >> teammate, give that teammate's score, and then write a qualitative >> evaluation so each of those responses is a separate column in the resulting >> spreadsheet. What creates the headache for me is that students don't enter >> their teammates in the same order so I have to do a lot of cutting and >> pasting to gather together all the scores and comments for a given student. >> Since I have more students than Herb (two classes each with 12-13 teams of >> 5-6 students), it can be quite time-consuming. Some of the web-based tools >> look quite useful but I really don't want to make my students create yet >> another account for an external service so I'd be particularly interested if >> anyone either has an ea >> sier way >> >> Jennifer >> **************************** >> Jennifer Imazeki >> Department of Economics >> San Diego State University >> homepage: http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~jimazeki/ >> Economics for Teachers blog: http://economicsforteachers.blogspot.com >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 7:57 AM, Herbert Coleman <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >>> I don't have "large" numbers (only 6 groups of 5-6 students) but, I >>> use a Google docs form for students to enter their peer evaluations. >>> I like it because,... well, I love spreadsheets (so now you know) and >>> the data is automatically entered and ready for me to manipulate. I >>> can also quickly see who has submitted their review and who is >>> lacking. I can tabulate the results and apply the grade weight. I >>> can also capture the comments to share with the student when needed. >>> Students are give time in class to go to the lab or library to >>> complete the assignment or they can do it at home. >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Bridges, Kristie >>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>>> Has anyone used iPeer, SparkPlus or other program for peer evaluation >>>> with a large number of students/groups ? If so, what were the pros >>>> and cons? Any recommendations for web-based peer evaluation tools >>>> would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kristie >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kristie Grove Bridges, PhD >>>> >>>> Associate Professor, Biochemistry >>>> >>>> WVSOM >>>> >>>> 400 N Lee St >>>> >>>> Lewisburg, WV 24901 >>>> >>>> 304-647-6223 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Herb Coleman, Ph.D >>> Dir. Instructional Computing and Technology Adjunct Professor of >>> Psychology Austin Community College Highland Business Center >>> 5930 Middle Fiskville Rd. >>> Austin, TX 78752 >>> [log in to unmask] >>> 512-223-7746 >>> ************************************************* >>> Don't Think Small >>> >>> "Arthur: It would have to be a 747. >>> Cobb: Why is that? >>> Arthur: Because on a 747 the pilot is up top, and the first class >>> cabin is in the nose, so no one would walk through. But you'd have to >>> buy out the entire cabin. And the first class flight attendant. >>> >>> Saito: I bought the airline.....It seemed neater." >>> >>> From the motion picture Inception >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAm_Cp3OKik >>> ************************************************* >> >