Reflecting back on my days as an undergraduate I can't help but think how dicey group projects could be. Sure a good group where everyone contributes and is motivated is great smooth sailing. But what about groups where there is conflict amongst the direction the group should take or there are one or more under-performing individuals.
Simon Crothers, one of PIDP 3250 classmates, posted a link to a method for evaluating group work from the University of Maryland. You can find it here. What I like about it is it provides clarity on what percentage of a learner's mark comes from the end result of the group and what percentage comes from their peers evaluating their contribution as a team member. I think presenting this model, or one similar to it, at the start of the group project would be helpful to learners as it would provide clarity and transparency.
At the same time I don't think this is enough as this alone does not answer the question of "What are the characteristics of a well performing team member?" and therefore it does not provide guidance on what characteristics one is to use to evaluate their team members' performance. Without answering these questions the group is not operating with a common definition of a well performing group and is not able to provide an accurate evaluation of their peer's performance as a team member.
A tool to help provide clarity on this would be a rubric for evaluating team performance. I found this one from the University at Buffalo: The State University of New York particularly helpful, especially the first page as it clearly lays out the key characteristics of group performance and allows individuals to rate their team members on each characteristic on a level 1 to a level 5:
Take a look and let me know what you think in the comment section below.
Simon Crothers, one of PIDP 3250 classmates, posted a link to a method for evaluating group work from the University of Maryland. You can find it here. What I like about it is it provides clarity on what percentage of a learner's mark comes from the end result of the group and what percentage comes from their peers evaluating their contribution as a team member. I think presenting this model, or one similar to it, at the start of the group project would be helpful to learners as it would provide clarity and transparency.
At the same time I don't think this is enough as this alone does not answer the question of "What are the characteristics of a well performing team member?" and therefore it does not provide guidance on what characteristics one is to use to evaluate their team members' performance. Without answering these questions the group is not operating with a common definition of a well performing group and is not able to provide an accurate evaluation of their peer's performance as a team member.
A tool to help provide clarity on this would be a rubric for evaluating team performance. I found this one from the University at Buffalo: The State University of New York particularly helpful, especially the first page as it clearly lays out the key characteristics of group performance and allows individuals to rate their team members on each characteristic on a level 1 to a level 5:
- Quality of Work
- Timeliness of Work
- Task Support
- Interaction
- Attendance
- Responsibility
- Involvement
- Leadership
- Overall Performance Rating
Take a look and let me know what you think in the comment section below.