Hi Jenny
Here's a multi part strategy I use
I explain early on to students that being an effective team worker is a critical graduate attribute and thus it has it's own seperate assessment weight for the course.
I revisit that concept regularly throughout the semester so it's hard to miss.
I also explain that i want to use a whole range of self and peer assessment activities as a way to help them be more effective judges of performance - their own and team peers as that's crucial upon graduation. Self regulation is more crucial
especially if we want to lead or supervise others (see David Nicol's work).
Hence when I pull out SPARK to collect, aggregate and publish anonymous team performance there are few surprises. Especially if they have done it once or twice formatively. (By the way, SPARK can also be configured so students have to
enter a minimum number of words to justify ratings). I use it once or twice formatively before summatively at the end of the semester because I want them to get feedback on their team working ability. They can do it online at home or at Uni before class. They
can also do it in a lab and given smartphones they can do it in class. I can publish aggregate data immediately. The first time they use SPARK I get them to do it with plenty of time to reflect and ensure its confidential and that usually means at home the
day or two before the next class. I can track who has done it and can easily email in SPARK those who haven't. I can also use SPARK to monitor any deviant behaviour (eg free riders attempting to sabotage; excessively high raters)
Each formative use is followed by an in-class facilitated discussion for each team. I give them the data (or get them to print it off before class) for their team.
It contains two aggregate factors - SAPA which is my self assessment to what my peers gave me and a good indicator of self perception in the team; SPA which is the aggregate of my performance in the team. The free response feedback accompanying
the anonymous ratings is not distributed and hopefully they read before class so there are no surprises in class.
In their teams I get them to:
1. reflect on the data
2. tell team peers what they are good at or done well.
3. give them the opportunity to self reveal any weakness or shortcoming.
4. practice giving and receiving good feedback (with key phrases).
By this time most problems are out in the open. Each of these class sessions was pre-empted with an announcement from me like the following:
"This is a great opportunity to personally grow and learn. The data will be a reflection and conversation starter. Don't miss out. Submitting the feedback (ratings and justifications) and then turning up to the class team discussion is
a clear indicator also of your ability as a team player.
As I am responsible for assessing your performance I will take your self and peer assessments as guidance for assessing each person's team performance. Any unexplained non-participation is a strong indication of your team working ability
and especially commitment. Hence zero for that component is not unlikely and it is in your hands.".
That combination of strategies usually works and no student is 'surprised' when I say there is insufficient evidence of their team working ability.
Cheers, Mark
The University of Sydney Business School
Australian Business Deans Council
m: +61403534067
On 04/01/2013, at 4:46 AM, "Jenny Morris" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Our problem is that we have no way of monitoring whether they complete the feedback forms or not as they complete them on our intranet. We were unable to find any other way of doing it. However they have been told that if they don’t complete the forms for each team member they will get zero for the final unit iRAT. I am hoping that this will be sufficient motivation but as this is our first time only time will tell!
Best wishes
Jenny
Dr Jenny Morris (SFHEA)
Associate Professor (Senior Lecturer) in Health Studies
Faculty of Health, Education & Society
Plymouth University
Knowledge Spa
Trelikse
Truro TR1 3HD
Tel: 01872 256461
From: Team-Based Learning [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennifer Imazeki
Sent: 03 January 2013 17:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: incentivizing team evaluations
Hi all,
Has anyone else had issues with students who do not complete the team evaluations at the end of the semester? My students complete theirs online, though the LMS, and there are always a couple students who 'forget'. This fall, there were more than usual (at least seven out of a class of 55); one team was particularly bad so the resulting scores only came from three of the six members. I do make the consequence fairly severe - if they do not complete the evaluations, then they do not get to use the Team RA scores (that is, the weight that would have been given to the Team RAs is instead given to their individual RAs, which are generally substantially lower). For most students, this has the effect of lowering their final semester grade by at least a plus/minus, sometimes more. Of course, when they see their grade, THEN they remember that they were supposed to do the evaluations but it's too late since all the grades are submitted. But I've had to deal with a lot of whining...
What strategies do you all use to make sure the evaluations get done?
thanks,
Jennifer
****************************
Jennifer Imazeki
Department of Economics
San Diego State University
homepage: jenniferimazeki.com
Economics for Teachers blog: http://economicsforteachers.blogspot.com