Assessing Collaborative Efforts

Assessment is always a difficult part of teaching. Students want and need validation of their work, and sometimes it is dependent on the work of others. In the assessment handbook developed by the Washington Center's Evaluation Committee, the suggestion is made to grade collaborative assignments in three parts; a group grade, a grade the student gives themselves, and a grade given by the other members of the group. Evaluation by other group members is important because it gives the instructor a clear idea of each member’s participation in a particular assignment.

Because everyone brings a different level of skill and knowledge, especially in an online course, using rubrics are the best way to fairly assess students. The criteria are clearly stated, and if the student meets the criteria, they should receive the maximum grade. It is not fair to judge students against each other because of the varying level of skills they bring to a course. Letting students have input in creating the rubrics is another way of ensuring student buy-in and success on a project.

Collaborative learning is an integral part of most online courses. If a student does not want to work collaboratively, then he/she may want to consider another type of course. Collaborative learning is good practice for the real world, because there are few careers where you are able to work completely alone. If a group member refuses to participate, the other members should divide the incomplete work to make sure the project gets finished. While this is not necessarily fair, in the real world when someone is paying you to do a job, they expect it to get done mo matter what the circumstances. It is up to the instructor to handle to assessment of this student. If it means a failing grade, that is because of the choice the student made not to participate. If the course was clearly outlines in the beginning, the instructor should not have to alter his/her assessment plan.

According to Lassiter & Orvis (2007), the role of the instructor is to regulate, monitor, and guide. They are to regulate interactions amongst the teacher, students and technology. They should monitor and maintain student discussions, and guide them to proper responses. If the student seems to be unclear on a topic, it is the instructor’s responsibility to understand the reason for the unclarity and guide the student to understanding.

References:
Lassiter, L.R. & Orvis, K.L. (2007) Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: Best
Practices and Principles for Instructors. Hershey: Information Science
Publishing.

Siemens, G. (2008). Assessment of collaborative learning. Vodocast. Laureate
Education, Inc.

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning communities. Vodocast. Laureate Education, Inc.

Washington Center's Evaluation Committee (Eds.) Assessment in and of Collaborative
Learning. Retrieved from ://www.evergreen.edu/washcenter/resources/acl/index.
html.

View the following blog which gives a detailed plan for assessing online learning.