Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Peer Evaluation' keyword pg.1 of 1
09 JANUARY 2013

Digital Humanities Now

"Digital Humanities Now showcases the scholarship and news of interest to the digital humanities community through a process of aggregation, discovery, curation, and review. Digital Humanities Now also is an experiment in ways to identify, evaluate, and distribute scholarship on the open web through a weekly publication and the quarterly Journal of Digital Humanities."

Editorial Board: Dan Cohen, Editor–in–Chief; Joan Fragaszy Troyano, Managing Editor; Sasha Hoffman, Editor; Jeri Wieringa, Editor.

1

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
19 NOVEMBER 2012

Using Individual Weighting Factor to fairly recognise and compensate individual contributions to group work

"The modified pool of marks technique will not, however, overcome a fundamental weakness of the procedure, namely that the students have to allocate a fixed pool of marks or points. This can be difficult to do using whole numbers. For example, if eight marks are to be allocated between four people and one is given four of them it is not possible to give all the rest the same mark. An alternative technique is to allow the students to allocate marks freely and then calculate an individual weighting factor based on the ratio between the individual score and the average score for all members of the group. This has the advantage of avoiding putting students in the situation where for every additional mark they give to one individual they have to take a mark off another individual. Indeed this is confirmed where a scale of marks is used and students are unconstrained in the marks that they can allocate. In this situation they show a reluctance to make much use of the lower end of the scale and consequently the mean score is well above the middle (average) point of the scale (Conway et al, 1993). Next year, in addition to using the modified pool of marks technique, a variant on the technique used by Conway et al (1993) will also be employed (Appendix 3). This technique awards the group mark to a student who makes an average contribution. Those who make greater (or lesser) contributions receive more (or less) than the original group mark. The method of calculation is described in Appendix 4."

(Mick Healey, 1993, p.4)

Mick Healey "Developing Student Capability Using Peer and Self Assessment: A Preliminary Evaluation of The Distribution of a Pool of Marks Technique for Assessing The Contribution of Individuals to a Group Project", Using Assessment to Develop Capability conference, 1993.

TAGS

1993accountabilityassessment criteriaassessment for learningassessment techniques • Atara Sivan • contribution to the group • David Kember • fairnessgrading schemegroup work • Higher Education for Capability (HEC) • individual accountability • individual contribution • Individual Weighting Factor • learning and teaching • May Wu • measurementmeasuring individual performancemeasuring instrument • Mick Healey • modified pool of marks technique • peer assessment • peer evaluationpeer learningproject work • Robert Conway • student performance

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.