Activity7

Discuss the challenges involved in assessment of online collaborative projects and activities. Be specific and give examples.

The primary purpose  of assessment in a learning community is to monitor student progress that would enhance teaching and learning to determine how well the standards have been met, and make necessary improvements based on the student learning outcome. Instructors and students who understand the value of assessment and participate in assessment activities benefit mostly from this work. For courses that have no assigned group activities, students are accountable only to the instructor; however, for effective implementation of any group based instructional format including collaborative learning, requires that students to be accountable to both the instructor and their peers. The process of establishing a peer assessment and evaluation system can be quite overwhelming; ultimately it is an essential tool for reinforcing each team member’s accountability that is so important to the collaborative learning environment.

Researchers have often claimed that peer assessment encourages students to become critical learners and to develop responsibilities and a sense of ownership for their peers’ learning, and help provide information to monitor the progress and participation of individual students (Lively, 2007; Tu & Lu, 2005). Instructors should look in to two approaches as how to distinguish and assess each individual’s contribution in a group would be: 1, The first approach is for the instructor to conduct an investigation, such as reviewing students’ online project journals that they should have maintained to show the systematic progress of their contribution to the group project. This would help instructors to find out the detailed descriptions of each member’s activities towards the project. However, the instructor needs to spend extra time and energy for such investigations. 2, The second approach is to ask the students to report the efforts of all the people in their group (Tu & Lu, 2005). Peer and Self assessment can be one way of dealing with the assessment problems in collaborative learning, as focus is on the individual’s efforts and inputs to the final group output.

Some research studies have also identified that the inclusion of collaborative learning within the curriculum has its own challenges. One of the main concerns for the instructors about assessing collaborative projects would be when it comes to grading poorly designed group assignments, that effect reducing grades for hard-working students or, “unfairly raising the grades of poor students who may have carried along by the hard-working students” (Michaelsen, 2009, p. 69). Considering this issue, two main problems to look in to the group collaboration projects is the //free-rider effect//, which is when one or more students in the group does little or no work at all, thereby contributing almost nothing to the well-being of the group and consequently decreasing the group’s ability to perform to their potential (Brooks & Ammons, 2003; Lee, 2008; Roberts & McInnerney, 2007). Secondly, doing the //individual assessment within the groups//, as it is difficult in an environment that allows students to contribute at varying skill levels (Burd et al., 2003; Lee, 2008).

One way to approach these assessment challenges is to use the Internet as a tool for implementing the assessments on group projects, which can provide students with an anonymous environment to express freely their thoughts and ideas about others’ work and also help speed up grading time for the instructors (Wen & Tsai, 2006; Williamson, 2010). Instructors can also share the assessment burden with students, and “shift roles from information transmitter to learning facilitator” (Lee, 2008, p. 6).

Over ten years of teaching online and conducting group assessments for students’ group projects in computer programming disciplines made me to learn and grow, and keep improving my assessment strategies in assessing the individuals in a collaborative career group project. I have observed that students have had negative perceptions about the use of the assessments on their group projects. Also, numerous studies have presented factors causing students’ negative perceptions toward peer and self assessment such as: lack of ability to judge peers’ works (Palloff & Pratt, 2007); lack of knowledge, subject matter expertise, and experience (Gayton, 2005); peer pressure (Sluijsmans et al., 2002); and the assessment being time-consuming (Zapatero, Maheshwari, & Chen, 2011).

I have adapted specific learning strategies appropriate for the circumstances to better understand students’ perceptions, monitor every phase of the teams’ projects, and increase students’ favorable perceptions to maximize the benefits of peer and self assessment. Lately, I am very interested to learn more about grounded theory approach and see whether I could apply this systematic mixed mode approach for better assessment practices for collaborative projects. Grounded theory approach was originally developed by Glaser and Strauss (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The aim of grounded theory methodology is to develop a theory that is grounded in data systematically gathered and analyzed.

Researchers have applied grounded theory approach to identify factors that would encourage or discourage students’ participation in peer assessment and examine students’ perceptions on assessment and group work (Lee, 2008; McConnell, 2006). I am trying to work with one of my other online instructor over the summer 2012 to find out whether online assessments can be made effective through grounded theory approach. I am gathering and analyzing the data from one of my online programming classes to learn more about how to assess individual contributions to group tasks that focused on collaborative learning activities. Since the Java programming course that I currently teach requires students to conduct assessments at the end of their career projects, they could provide their perceptions based on their experiences with the peer and self-assessments.

When using collaborative team based learning, these challenges can be largely overcome by using a comprehensive feedback and grading system, that ensures individual student accountability to both the instructor and peers that has an individual performance component, a team performance component, and a peer evaluation component (Michaelsen, 2009). References Brooks, C. M., & Ammons, J. L. (2003). Free riding in group projects and the effects of timing, frequency, and specificity of criteria in peer assessments. //Journal of Education for Business, 78( //5), 268-272.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Burd, E., Drummond, S., & Hodgson, B. (2003). Using Peer & Self Assessment for Group Work. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Proceedings of 4th Annual LTSH-ICS Conference //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">(pp. 232-236). NUI Galway.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Gaytan, J. (2005). Effective assessment techniques for online instruction. //Information Technology,// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Learning, and Performance Journal, 23( //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">1), 25-33.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Michaelsen, L. K. (2009). Team-based learning: Small group learning's next big step. //New Directions for// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">teaching and learning. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;"> Vol. 116. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Lee, H. (2008). //Students perceptions of peer and self assessment in a higher education online// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">collaborative learning environment. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;"> The University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved May 12, 2012 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Lively, J. (2007). //Assessing individual contribution in online collaborative activities.// Nova Southeastern University. Retrieved May 12, 2012 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">McConnell, D. (2006). //E-learning groups and communities.// London: SRHE & Open U Press.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). //Building Online Learning Communities: Effective Strategies for the// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Virtual Classroom. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;"> San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Roberts, T. S., & McInnerney, J. M. (2007). Seven problems of online group learning (and their Solutions). //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Educational Technology & Society, 10( //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">4), 257-268.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Sluijsmans, D. M. A. (2002). //Student involvement in assessment: the training of peer assessment skills.// Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). //Basic of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">grounded theory //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;"> (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Tu, Y., & Lu, M. (2005). Peer-and-Self Assessment to Reveal the Ranking of Each Individual’s Contribution to a Group Project, //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Journal of Information Systems Education, 16( //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">2), 197-205.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Wen, M. L., & Tsai, C. (2006). University students’ perceptions of and attitudes toward (online) peer assessment. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Higher Education, 51( //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">1), 27-44.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Williamson, W. D. (2010). //Assessing constructivist elements in the online learning environment.// The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Retrieved May 13, 2012 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Zapatero, E. G., Maheshwari, S., & Chen, J. (2011). Effectiveness Of Active Learning Environment: Should Testing Methods Be Modified?. Allied Academies International Conference: //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Proceedings Of The Academy Of Educational Leadership (AEL), 16( //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">2), 61-65.