Teamwork Assessment for self and peers (Brightpsace HTML version)

Question 4.6

What if one member, or a few members, contribute much more to the project than everyone else? Will the grading be fair?

Answer

Normally each member of a group gets the same grade for a group assignment. However when some members have contributed much more than others the grades for each member can be different. The professor relies on honest assessments from group members to decide if an adjustment to grades is warranted.

There are many valuable ways to contribute to groupwork. For example, helping the team to work as an efficient unit or doing the necessary research can be as important as doing the actual work of preparing or delivering a presentation.

For the first group presentation there was an informal method of assessing fairness: everyone was asked to answer a survey informing the professor if their team worked equitably (that is, if everyone contributed roughly the same to the presentation).

For the (multi-phase) project an assessment using a scale like the one shown below will be used for the phases.

I. Group Management Functions
Unsatisfactory Team Member lacks initiative only assumes responsibility when forced or for personal reasons untrustworthy, deceptive, hides own mistakes, takes credit for everything	Exceptionally Valuable Team Member willing to take on unpopular tasks able to defer to the groups' needs helps form cohesive team
Unsatisfactory Support of work and discussion of teammates does not seek feedback is defensive and fails to respond to feedback	Exceptional Support of work and discussion of teammates presents extra material supports claims with appropriate references clearly explains ideas / produces innovative ideas seeks to understand views of others truly helps other to learn
Unsatisfactory Leadership is dictatorial refuses to share workload lacks initiative dominates the group	Exceptional Leadership plans effective meetings ensures equitable participation helps team reach consensus encourages comments from everyone listens to others is consistent and follows-through takes initiative seeks appropriate responsibility deals well with different personality types manages domineering members delegates to use team members strengths
Unsatisfactory in Caring about teamwork only wants successful product no interests in teamwork hinders group process pleases superiors while undermining peers	Exceptional in Caring about teamwork supports others in sharing their ideas works co-operatively pays attention to team dynamics permits appropriate time for building team rapport
Inadequate preparation presents the minimal amount of material or ideas seldom supports ideas with facts from class or readings	Exceptional preparation always prepared for meetings responsive acts in a timely fashion completes work efficiently and thoroughly
II. Idea Generation
Unsatisfactory Contribution to goal (of phase or project) misses meeting is unprepared	Exceptional Contribution to goal (of phase or project) is familiar with material makes case clearly and persuasively
Unsatisfactory Helping planning and revising doesn't contribute to discussion procrastinates just tell me what to do and I'll do it overlooks important data fails to identify or solve problems	Exceptionally Helpful planning and revising willing to take on unpopular tasks brings group to consensus looks ahead to future phases flexible but realistic outlook
Unsatisfactory in Valuing diversity lacking appropriate respect lacking appropriate empathy and compassion impatient with others does not listen/pay attention	Exceptional in valuing diversity listens actively encourages different approaches patient with others' differences
III. Labour
Unsatisfactory Execution procrastinates does not plan well misses deadlines does bare minimum (or less)	Exceptional Execution completes work efficiently and thoroughly incorporates feedback from team and data into work collaborates with team members thinks how the pieces fit together

Note that these questions are for assessing contribution not effort, difficulty, inconvenience etc.

There is a PDF version of the above chart too.

Sources

Susan Holmes of Dalhousie University provided excellent advice about the design of every aspect of the teamwork part of the project (for Dalhousie University's CSCI 3160 course) this rubric was originally used for.

I also found the following sources particularly helpful as I developed the peer assessment of groupwork process and form. Prof. Holmes helped refine the form.

Improving Teaching and Learning Group Work and Group Assessment (2004 Edition) from the University Teaching Development Centre (UTDC) at Victoria University of Wellington.

I found Appendix D (Group Member Contribution) especially helpful so I have based parts of my form on it.

Peer and Self Assessment of Student Work Prepared by Michelle Schwartz, Research Associate, for the Learning & Teaching Office at Ryerson University.

Parts of the rationale are drawn from lists on pages 1 and 7.
I found the example of the Indiana University's School of Medicine Peer/Self Assessment Program Self Assessment form by Carolyn Hayes (which is described as being adapted from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry Peer Assessment Program) so helpful that I use the assessment scale in my form and have based much of my form on it.

Assessment Matters: Self-Assessment and Peer Assessment Teaching Development by Dorothy Spiller (February 2009), produced by the Teaching Development Unit at Waikato University.

Methods for assessing groupwork from the University of Waterloo's Centre for Teaching Excellence at <URL:https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/teaching-resources/teaching-tips/developing-assignments/group-work/methods-assessing-group-work (undated; last accessed 2013-09-10).

I adapted a few of their examples of aspects of team functioning (e.g. generating ideas and solutions and willingly taking on unpopular jobs) for this form.

From the Frequently Asked Questions

Question 4.6

Answer