Score distribution as a tool to reveal group dynamics in student projectsReport as inadecuate




Score distribution as a tool to reveal group dynamics in student projects - Download this document for free, or read online. Document in PDF available to download.

1 PASS - Process for Adaptative Software Systems Télécom Bretagne, IRISA-D4 - LANGAGE ET GÉNIE LOGICIEL 2 INFO - Département informatique 3 DF - Direction de la Formation 4 Lab-STICC TB CACS IAS Lab-STICC - Laboratoire des sciences et techniques de l-information, de la communication et de la connaissance 5 ELEC - Département Electronique 6 Lab-STICC TB MOM DIM Lab-STICC - Laboratoire des sciences et techniques de l-information, de la communication et de la connaissance 7 MO - Département Micro-Ondes 8 LUSSI - Département Logique des Usages, Sciences sociales et Sciences de l-Information 9 OPT - Département Optique 10 Didier Baux Communication Entreprise

Abstract : Improving workgroup assessment is a constant concern for teachers involved in complex project courses. Mixing classical teacher-s assessment with more innovative peer assessment has definitely given a richer and more accurate insight of the group dynamics. Nevertheless, it has side effects that need to be managed. A performance measurement system strongly influences the way students work. So the group dynamics are largely dependent on the way students feel evaluated. As a consequence, introducing peer assessment gives more autonomy to students group on one hand but also gives them a powerful tool to influence directly their own organisation and dynamics. It is also an individual tool to favour introspective evaluation regarding personal involvement. We aim to educate future managers who will have to motivate teams, reward merit, fairly penalise and negotiate objectives and trade-offs. Even if students agree on peer assessment and score distribution, this agreement does not give the solution by itself. The methodology and ethics of the score distribution seem more important than the result itself. Guaranteeing fairness in score distribution cannot be done without external intervention - i.e. a teacher-. Over four years, the full assessment mechanism has been improved but has also highlighted this fact. The trade-off between careful but sometimes intrusive teacher monitoring on one side and student autonomy on the other side is still to be looked for.

Keywords : Mark Individual contribution Team work Engineering education





Author: Claire Lassudrie - Marie-Pierre Adam - Matthieu Arzel - Antoine Beugnard - Jean-Philippe Coupez - François Gallée - Sylvie Kero

Source: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/



DOWNLOAD PDF




Related documents