An Investigation Into Students Perceptions Of Group Assignments

JPD:3:3: 11
lecturers and the students in IT opportunities and
capacities was pinpointed. Achieving the sustainability
of electronic educational and educational resources,
introduction of new teaching systems, rational use of ICT
tools, existence of technical support, and
professionalism of teachers serve as the key to the
modernization of higher education in Uzbekistan.
References
Law № -II of Uzbekistan regarding Information Literacy.
Available at http://lex.uz/cuz/doc/list/law_list-03.html.
Resolution № PD-1487 of the President of the Republic of
Uzbekistan dated February 23, 2011 re: The Steps to
Further Development the Quality of Information/Library
and Information Resource Services Based on Information
and Communication Technologies in 2011-2015 , The
Collection of laws of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 2011.
American Library Association (2001) ACRL best practices
initiative: Characteristics of programs of information
literacy that illustrate best practices, working edition.
Available at: http://www.ala.org/acrl/ [Accessed 6 May 6,
2002].
Dewald, N. (1999) Transporting good library instruction
practices into the Web environment: An analysis of online
tutorials . Journal of Academic Librarianship. 25 Jan. 1999.
pp.26-31.
Bruce C. (1997) The Seven Faces of Information Literacy.
Adelaide: Auslib Press.
Corrall S. (1998) Key skills for students in higher education.
SCONUL Newsletter, pp.25-29.
David Herron. (2002) Management of library pedagogical
development: from models to statistics. 68th
IFLA Council
and General Conference proceeding. 18-24 August 2002.
Karolinska Institute University Library Stockholm, Sweden.
Tempus Project (2009) E-learning and competence
infrastructure on retraining.
Armengol M. (2002) The impact of globalization on activity of
American IBERO virtual University. University//Higher
education in Europe 8(3)
Mohammed A. and Keita T. (2010) Assessing information
literacy competency of Information Science and Library
Management graduate students of Dhaka University .
IFLAJournal. (36) pp.300-316.
Modern information technologies in education. (2003) An
analytical review of international development trends of
higher education. January – June. 2003. part II. Available at
http://charko.narod.ru/tekst/an5/2.html
An Investigation into Stude ts Per eptio s of Group Assig e ts
Yongmei Bentley & Shamim Warwick, Business School, University of Bedfordshire
The collection of student feedback is a central strategy
to monitor the effectiveness of teaching and learning at
educational institutions (Meyer, 2010). This paper
analyses the feedback and findings from a recent
uestio ai e su e of stude ts e pe ie e a d
perceptions of group work at the University of
Bedfordshire at both undergraduate and postgraduate
levels. The main objective of this study is to raise
practical issues that teachers need to consider in
designing and carrying out group assessments. This is
aimed at overcoming the drawbacks, while amplifying
the benefits, of group work, and improving stude ts
engagement and performance in this type of
assessment.
The following are the key findings from analysis of the
questionnaire replies:
a) Group assignments were indeed valued by
students despite the perennial problem of
perceived unequal contribution from group
members. Respondents recognised the benefits of
group assignments as well as the drawbacks.
b) A wide variety of communication strategies had
been employed between students for working on
group assignments, as well as individual
assignments when seeking input and support from
peers.
c) Students had developed a number of strategies for
deali g ith tea e e s ho did ot pull thei
eight , a d it as suggested that so e of these
could be formalised, such as requiring minutes to
be taken of key meetings.
A comparative analysis was also undertaken of the
difference in responses between the undergraduate and
postgraduate student groups. Overall, the research
underlined the utility of group assignments, and
suggested a number of ways in which the potential
drawbacks can be mitigated.
As group work is a common approach for education
institutions in teaching and learning activities, the
outcomes of this study should contribute to a better
u de sta di g of stude ts feeli gs a d pe eptio s
about these, and to a better designed approach to
overcome the drawbacks of group assignments.
Keywords: students, group assignment, questionnaire
survey
Introduction
Group work at education institutions is now considered
as one of the best approaches for developing stude ts
communication skills and acquiring knowledge. This
agrees with the results from the study by Smith and
Bath (Smith & Bath, 2006) who revealed that interaction
of members engaging in group assignments would
develop generic skills, such as communication and
critical thinking. Group work appears to offer teachers
an effective way to engage students, to increase the
complexity and challenge of the tasks that students gain
experience of working on, to offer students the
opportunity for collaborative working, and to offer the
possibility of reduced marking loads (Gibbs, 2009).

JPD:3:3: 12
However, not everything is positive, and making group
work fully effective is challenging.
This paper analyses the feedback and findings from a
recent questionnaire survey of students e pe ie e a d
perceptions of group assignments at the University of
Bedfordshire (UoB) at both undergraduate and
postgraduate levels. The purpose of this study is to raise
practical issues that teachers need to consider in
designing and carrying out group assessment with a
view to overcoming the drawbacks, and amplifying the
e efits, of su h o k, a d to i p o e stude ts
engagement and performance in these activities.
Literature Review
The benefits to students of group work have been
demonstrated both in general (Johnson et al., 1991) and
in specific contexts. For example, Mello (1993) identifies
ajo e efits of g oup o k: stude ts a gai a
i sight i to g oup d a i s ; the a ta kle a o e
o p ehe si e assig e ts ; i te pe sonal skills can
e de eloped ; stude ts a e o e e posed to
othe s poi ts of ie ; a d e o e p epa ed fo
the o e ial o ld .
A comprehensive review on the implementation of small
group learning within individual discipline areas also
shows very positive impacts on student performance,
marks, attitudes towards learning and persistence or
retention (Gibbs, 2009). For example, Springer et al.
(1999) reviewed 383 studies and found evidence of
idesp ead i ple e tatio of s all-g oup lea i g at
undergraduate level in the three disciplines studied.
Problem based learning (PBL) also uses learning in
groups and meta-analyses of studies comparing PBL with
other pedagogies show consistent benefits to student
learning processes and outcomes from PBL (Dochy et al.,
2003).
JISC (2008) recognises the benefit for academics/tutors
in setting group work tasks in that these can significantly
reduce [staff] workload. However, JISC also reports work
by Kennedy (2006): …there is evidence to suggest that
students undertaking such projects express concern
about the way in which marks are awarded for
out o es p odu ed the g oup olla o ati el .
Some of the findings from analysis of literature on key
factors affecting group assignment (Meyer, 2010;
Kennedy, 2006; Barfield, 2003) can be summarised as
follows:
a) Group structure – Ensuring that group members
recognise the mixed talents within the group, and
hence scope for assigning different roles to
different members to perform specific tasks.
b) The issue of individual domination – Emphasising
the need to respect different points of view, and
not have one or a few individuals dominate the
group.
c) Fair contribution – E su i g e ual a d a ti e
pa ti ipatio of ea h g oup e e .
d) Evaluation of individual contribution – This is
diffi ult, ut a e assisted a o ous pee
e ie , i di idual efle ti e epo t ; a d/o tuto
i ol e e t .
A review of relevant literature shows that there are
studies on the general topics of group work and group
assessment as discussed above. For example, there are
case studies that were designed to address problems
with the assessment of groups. However, there have
been limited publications that have empirical evidence
to inform the design decision of group assignments
(Gibbs, 2009). It is hoped that the outcomes of this
study can contribute to this.
Background of group work to this study
At the UoB where this study was conducted, we use
group-based assignments for most units, and for both
formative and summative assessments to enable
stude ts to e efit f o o e a othe s k o ledge a d
experience. Group assignments include case studies,
oral presentations, and group written reports,
sometimes with a statement about individual
contributions. The essence of the group assessment is
that undertaking the assessment constitutes a learning
experience in its own right.
The weight of a group assignment within a summative
assessment varies between different courses, and
different units within the same course – normally
between 30% and 60%.
An assignment group usually consists of 3-6 members
depending on the nature of the assessment. The
students can form their own assignment groups, but are
encouraged to mix with peers with different experiences
and different culture backgrounds. Sometimes, the tutor
in charge helps students to form their groups, especially
in the first term of their study at the university.
For some group assignments, each member of the group
submits an anonymous statement of his/her perception
of the contribution by each of the group members
(including himself/herself). In other cases, the group
reaches agreement about the contribution by each
member and submits one form which is signed by all.
Some tutors conduct oral interviews on the group
assignments to make sure that each student is given a
fair grade for the group work.
Research Methodology
A questionnaire survey was used for data collection for
this research. The areas covered in the questionnaire
were fairly broad, including student preferred type of
assignment; degree of peer support; working styles;
strategies for fair contribution; communication tools;
skills needed for group assignments; and the perceived
benefits and drawbacks of group assignments. The
survey also obtained additional comments from
respondents about specific problems encountered, as
well as suggestions for assignment improvement.

JPD:3:3: 13
The survey was carried out at the end of the academic
year 2010/11 among two groups of students. One group
was Level 1 undergraduates, and the other MSc
students, in the Business School. Participation in the
survey was voluntary.
In total, 140 questionnaires were distributed in the last
class at the end of the second semester, and 106 were
completed and returned, of which 30 were by MSc
students and 76 by Level-1 undergraduates. This
represented an acceptably high return rate of 75 per
cent.
Data Analysis and Findings
Data analysis was conducted using Microsoft Excel. This
section presents the key results from this survey in the
sequence of questions in the survey form.
Question 1: What do you prefer, individual or group
assignments?
It is interesting and perhaps even surprising, to see that
the preference of students between group and
individual assignments is very close – 51per cent to 49
per cent. Note that the level of the course (Masters vs.
Level 1) and the preference for group work are
statistically independent.
Questions 2 and 3: Which of the following do you do
with your peers on an individual/group assignment (tick
all that apply)?
Fig. 1 Working with peers on individual and group assignment
As indicated in Fig 1, it is understandable the students
tend to do all the activities for their group assignments.
On individual assignment they work with peers to some
extent. However, possibly worryingly, some students
exchange files/documents with others on an individual
assignment, and this suggests further investigation
Question 4: Which do you prefer when working on a
group assignment — splitting up the work or working
together?
In terms of workload strategy for group work, the
p efe e e et ee splitti g up the o k a d orking
togethe as e a tl : pe e t. The preference for
group/individual assignments and for splitting the
work/working together are not independent at the 5 per
cent level: Students who prefer individual assignments
prefer to split up the work; and students who prefer
group assignments prefer to work together.
Question 5: Which strategies do you use to encourage
fair contribution from all members to a group
assignment?

JPD:3:3: 14
Fig. 2 Strategies for fair contributions
On this important issue, students were asked to list their
st ategies. Fig. i di ates that sha e o kload sta ds
out with a very high percentage of the total choices (39
per cent , follo ed share ideas and informatio
per cent , set deadli es a d ha e eeti gs pe e t
ea h , use pee st e gth a d e ou age pa ti ipatio
(6 per cent ea h . Su p isi gl , utual ag ee e t ,
ette o u i atio , a d help ea h othe e e ot
considered as key strategies for encouraging fair
contributions.
Question 6: How do you feel about contributing more than your fair share (tick all that apply)?
Fig. 3 Perception of contribution of more than fair share
We were very pleased to see that nearly 80 per cent of
the participants in the survey felt that they are happy to
contribute more than their fair share to the group work
ith the e pla atio s: if this ill i p o e the o k a d
the efo e the g ade o e pe e t , o e ause I
feel I will learn more f o this e pe ie e o if I a
help othe g oup e e s oth over 20 per cent).
Some chose the do ot i d o e pe e t), and
a out % hose: I do t a t to e ause it ill i ease
o kload . So it see s that if the stude ts a see
the e efit, the a e ge e all happ to ake a o e
tha fai sha e o t i utio to the g oup assig e t
(see Fig. 3). However, one respondent commented:
So eti es it is a o i g he ou g oup ates take it
for granted and assume that no matter whether they
contribute or not, you are going to do their part of work
as ell. This edu es ou i te est a d o e t atio .
Question 7: Which communication tools do you use for
group communication if you are not physically together?
To this question, three choices were given – a. Tools
provided by the university systems (e.g. tools on BREO,
the u i e sit s virtual learning environment); b. Other
tools (e.g. Facebook, MSN, Skype); c. Other (please
specify). There were about one-third of the respondents
for each of the three choices (34 per cent, 32 per cent
and 34 per cent respectively). When students were
asked to spe if othe i the thi d hoi e , pe
e t said pho e o l , pe e t pho e a d
essagi g , pe e t essagi g o l a d pe
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
a. Happy to if this will improve the…
b. Happy to because I feel I will learn…
c. Happy to if I can help other group…
d. I do t i d
e. I think it is unfair because we will all…
f. I do t a t to e ause it ill…
How do you feel about contributing more than your fair
share?

JPD:3:3: 15
cent ea h e t fo e ail o l a d e ail a d othe
tools .
Here it is worth noting that as many as 66 per cent of
the respondents use many social networking systems for
collaborating on their group work that were not
provided by the university. These included phone calls,
texting, personal e-mails, Skype, Blackberry messaging
and so on.
Question 8: On a scale of 1 to 5, how do you feel about
assignments which require you to work together but
then submit individual work?
Surprisingly, as many as a third of the respondents
love/like working together but submitting individual
work, while 39 per cent do not seem to mind doing so,
but nearly a quarter do not like the idea of working
together but submitting individual work.
Question 9: Do you tend to keep a record of what each
member has done for peer-review purposes?
For this question, more than half (55 per cent) of
respondents do not keep a record for peer-review
purposes. Preference for group/individual assignments
a d keepi g a e o d of o t i utio fo peer review
purposes a e ot i depe de t at the pe e t level.
Students who prefer individual assignments do not keep
a record; fewer students than expected who prefer
group assignments keep a record.
Fig. 4 Working in group but submitting individual work
Question 10: How do you grade a group member whose
contribution was considerably poor compared with other
group members?
To this question, we were very pleased to see that 71
per cent of the espo de ts sele ted the hoi e: I gi e
students grades that truly reflect thei lo o t i utio ,
while 29 per cent hose I gi e e e o e si ila g ades
ega dless of thei o t i utio . This suggests that
tutors may need to work with students to discuss the
value of peer assessment and the eventual long-term
benefit to poor-contributing students which may be
gained from honest grading.
Question 11: Which do you prefer? A. Each group
member submits an anonymous peer review form and B.
The group reach an agreement and submit one peer
review form.
To this question, 57 per cent of students indicated that
they prefer submitting an anonymous peer review form,
and the rest prefer the group reach an agreement
before they submit one peer review form.
Question 12: Do you feel that you can learn more by
doing group work and why?
Three-quarters of the respondents feel that they can
learn more by doing group work, while 16 per cent do
not agree, and 8 per cent were not sure. Interestingly,
30 per cent of respondents who prefer individual
assignments felt that they can learn more by doing
group work and give the reasons as follows:
 Because ideas are shared and can be argued;
 Because some stuff I might not know, [and] I can
see them doing it;
 Group can conduct more research on the topic;
 Having conflict forces deeper thought;
 Be ause I a see othe people s opi io ;
 You can pick up skills from other members.
Question 13: What skills do you feel you can develop
when you work on a group assignment?
10%
14%
39%
22%
11%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
1 2 3 4 5
Response 1 = hate, 5 =love
How do you feel about working together and submitting
individual work?

JPD:3:3: 16
Fig. 5 Skills developed by doing group assignments
To this question two skills stood out – tea o k skills
a d o u i atio skills hi h add up to o e pe
cent of the total responses. Other skills students
developed by doing group assignments are: self-
development, time management, academic
development, leadership, interpersonal and inter-
cultural communication. In addition, the words
frequently mentioned include:
listening, sympathy, patience, adaptability, tolerance,
reliability, confidence, responsibility, empowerment,
motivation, intellectual, numeracy, research, critical
thinking, creative thinking, courage to defend a point of
view, dealing with people of different views.
Question 14: What do you feel is the biggest benefit of
working on group assignments?
Fig. 6 Biggest benefit of working on group assignments
To this question the respondents gave various answers,
and Fig. 6 gives a summary of the key benefits. These
include: use peer strength, share workload, more input,
develop interpersonal and team work skills, learn from
peers, and increase self-confidence. Some of the
respondents gave details of the benefits of group work
which can be categorised as:
A. Good team-work skills. For example, some students
mentioned the following:
 Wo ki g i g oups p epa es us fo eal tea o k
for our futu e a ee ;
 You learn how to work with other people as in many
actual workplaces team work is required.

JPD:3:3: 17
B. Shared workload and ideas, and improve grades. For
example, some students mentioned the following:
 A chance to split the work, feel more relaxed;
 Opportunity to listen to other points of view;
 Different ideas, can work together and make
assignment look good and get a good grade;
 Good team work help improve the grade;
 Some people may have more knowledge on that
particular topic than yourself which could ultimately
raise your grade than if you were work by yourself.
C. Other skills. For example, some students mentioned
the following:
 G oup assig e ts a e good as it p o ides us
e pe ie e of liste i g to diffe e t ideas ;
 It is amazing that working in a group allows us to
k o ea h othe s e pe ie es, lea i g skills, thei
cultures & behaviour.
 G oup o k is a good lea i g p o ess .
The key benefits can perhaps be best summarised using
o e of the espo de t s o e ts: Sha e i fo atio ,
share ideas, less workload, more input and ideas, more
resources, help each other, more adaptable, more
confident, can communicate with people of different
culture, can exchange ideas, opportunity to understand
and learn from others, become more knowledgeable,
build up elatio ship a d ake e f ie ds .
Question 15: What do you feel is the biggest drawback
of working on group assignments?
Of course the respondents also saw the drawbacks of
working on group assignments. Fig. 7 summarises the
key ones, which include: uneven contribution, rely on
others, poor commitment and attitude, poor time
management, low ability and contribution, and so on.
Fig. 7 Biggest perceived drawbacks of working on group assignments
Some respondents also listed other drawbacks of group
work which can be categorised as:
A. Poor motivation and commitment. For example, some
students mentioned the following:
 Difficult to co-operate if people are not well
motivated;
 Difficult to bring people to the common interest;
 People not attending or working up to standards;
 Some tend to rely on others, are not on time, and
waste time;
 People get distracted very easily;
 Some members take it easy and feel relaxed;
 It may take longer for tasks to be completed due to
availability of members.
B. Uneven/unfair contribution. For example, some
students mentioned the following:
 Some people do not contribute as much as others,
and you end up doing most of the work;
 There are some who do not do any work where as
others do all the work;
 Some people may not do equal amount of work
which is unfair for the rest of the group;
 People uses others and contribute less for the
assignments;
 Some in the group might not put in any effort into
the work and bring down your grade.
Question 16: Do you have any suggestions and/or
comments for group assignments?

JPD:3:3: 18
Fig. 8 Suggestions for group assignments
Fig. 8 illustrates the main suggestions from the
respondents to improve the effectiveness of doing
group assignments. These include: peer review, ensure
equal contribution, less group work, group work with
individual elements, help with group formation, and
more group meetings.
Here are some examples of comments from the
respondents:
 G oup assig e ts i p i iple is e good a d
helps to know course mates better, but the
challe ges a e so eti es o e hel i g.
 G oup o k a e a o i g at ti es e ause ot
e e o e does the o k.
 G oup o k a e ha d if ou a e o ki g ith the
o g people.
 G oup o k a e good ut so eti es ou a
feel that you can't learn anything. Doing individual
assig e ts a e o e effe ti e as it s easie to
lea hat to do.
 G oup assig e ts a e good a d it is a diffe e t
e pe ie e of ha i g diffe e t ideas.
 Wo ki g i g oups p epa es us fo eal tea o k
for our future career.
 Wo ki g i a g oup allo s us to k o ea h othe s
experiences, learning skills, their cultures and
eha iou .
 It is eall good to do o k i g oup as it helps at
the p ofessio al le el.
 It does ha e its ad a tages a d disad a tages.
However, I believe that the experience looks very
good o CV a d ill e helpful i the futu e.
Conclusions
Group assignments are indeed valued despite perennial
problems such as unequal contribution from group
members. The key findings from this study are:
a) Regarding student preference of the type of
assignment, the split between like group and
individual work is roughly equal, so there are no
strong likes and dislikes.
b) To encourage fair contribution and improve team
performance, students have developed a number
of strategies: encourage participation, have group
meetings, use peer strength, share ideas, share
information, share workload, and set deadlines.
c) A wide variety of communication strategies have
been involved for working on group assignments,
and also for individual assignments when seeking
input and support from peers. This suggests that
the university should also explore and facilitate
the use of these systems.
d) Students do see both benefits and drawbacks of
group work. While the biggest benefits frequently
mentioned are: use peer strength, share workload,
more input, develop interpersonal and team work
skills, learn from peers, and increase self-
confidence, the biggest drawbacks are: uneven
contribution, poor commitment, poor time
management, and low ability and contribution.
e) The majority of the respondents feel that they can
learn more by doing group work, especially in
terms of the development of team work and
communication skills.
In follow-on research, a comparative analysis will be
undertaken to analyse the differences in responses
between the undergraduate and postgraduate student
g oups. Also, the fi di gs a out stude ts pe eptio s of
group assignments will be investigated in more detail
through interviews with individual students randomly
selected from the survey participants.
As group course work is a common approach for
education institutions in their teaching and learning
activities, the outcomes of this study should contribute
to a ette u de sta di g of stude ts feeli gs a d
perceptions about these, and to a better designed
approach to overcome the drawbacks of group
assignments. It is recognised that the survey was
conducted among students of one university only and it
might have had biased results. However, as students
generally have common characteristics it is believed that
the findings from this study should be applicable to
students groups of other education institutions.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%

JPD:3:3: 19
References
Ba field, ‘.L. Stude ts pe eptio s of a d satisfa tio
with group grades and the group experience in the college
classroom . Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,
28 pp. 355-369.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P. & Giibels, D. (2003)
Effects of problem-based learning: a meta-analysis .
Learning and Instruction, 13 (5) pp. 533-568.
Gibbs, G. (2009) The assessment of group work: lessons from
the literature, Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange,
Brooks University, UK.
JISC (2008) E-Assessment: An overview of JISC activities. JISC
funded e-assessment developments.
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/briefingpapers/2008/b
peassessoverviewv2.aspx.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T. & Smith, K. (1991) Co-operative
learning: Increasing college faculty instructional
productivity. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education report No.4.
Washington DC.: The George Washington University School
of Education and Human development.
Kennedy, G.J. (2006) Peer assessment in Group Projects: Is It
Worth it? Australian Computing Education Conference
2005. http://crpit.com/confpapers/CRPITV42Kennedy.pdf,
accessed on 01/10/2012.
Mello, J.A. Improving individual member accountability
in small work settings . Journal of Management Education,
17(2) pp.253-259.
Meyer, L.H. (2010) Editorial — Research on tertiary assessment
policy and practices . Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 64
(3), July 2010 pp. 226–230.
Smith, C. & Bath, D. (2006) The role of the learning community
in the development of discipline knowledge and generic
graduate outcomes . Higher Education, 51 (2) pp. 259-86.
Springer, L., Stanne, M.E. & Donovan, S.S. (1999) Effects of
small group learning of undergraduate Science,
Mathematics, Engineering and Technology: a meta-
analysis . Review of Educational Research, 69 (1) pp. 21-51.
Book Reviews
Thinking Out Loud on Paper
Lil Brannon, Sally Griffin, Karen Haag, Tony Iannone,
Cindy Urbanski, and Shana Woodward
Heinemann (2008)*
Review/Commentary by Jennifer P. Gray
Thinking Out Loud on Paper discusses the use of the
da ook i iti g lass oo s. These six
writers/teachers/researchers collaborated to share their
experiences and their rationale for using the daybook in
their writing classes. The authors describe the daybook
as a tool that e use i ou dail li es ith ou stude ts,
as teacher resea he s, as ite s p. . The da ook is
a ha d o e ote ook ith stit hed-i pages that a e
diffi ult to e o e, hi h allo s stude ts to g aduall
let go of the perfectionism they have learned to expect
of the sel es p. . Tea he /‘esea he Ralph
Flet he des i es da ook o te ts as stuff that
defies des iptio that stude ts a epeatedl e isit
as eade s, ite s, a d thi ke s p. . The autho s
indicate that the daybook is more than a diary or journal
fo usi g o just the stude ts pe so al a d ofte
p i ate thoughts p. . I stead, the da ook is
desig ed to e a pla e fo f eel sha i g iti g, ideas
a d la guage that a p o ide ite s ith a pla e to
thi k a d de elop pp. , . The si ite s
collectively st ess the eed to u tu e atu al u iosit
and questioning to create a nation of thinkers and give
people the po e to ake a d uestio ea i g p.
127). The daybook is one of the tools these writers use
as they strive for this goal.
The authors provide readers with practical suggestions
concerning the use of the daybook in the classroom
setting as well as the theoretical explanations behind
these practical techniques. Readers will find examples of
ready-to-use successful classroom activities with student
sample responses, and the theoretical reasons behind
why these activities help writers. Teachers can pluck
activities from the pages of this text and have a clear
understanding of the theory behind the practice. The six
writers have different backgrounds, varying from
university professor to elementary school teacher, and
they each share how the daybook can be used in a
variety of situations, from fourth-grade classes to a
senior-seminar class to teacher professional
development meetings. One commonality the authors
share is participation in the University of North Carolina
at Cha lotte s Natio al W iti g P oje t.
The text begins by discussing what a daybook is, how to
use it, how to introduce it to students, and why writers
benefit from their encounters with daybooks. There are
chapters that discuss digital daybooks and how to assess
daybooks. The assessment process, also called a
da ook defe se, sho s eade s ho to p o ide
ea i gful feed a k a d e aluatio that gi es stude ts
ownership over the assessment of this important work
th ough efle tio pp. , . I this ase, assess e t
is more than just surveillance or checking for
completion; students and teachers are co-participators
in the assessment process that encourages critical and
self-reflective thinking. Five of the writers provide
commentary about their experiences with daybook
assessment, and they even include sample assessments
completed by their students. Readers will find daybook
assessment plans for classes including college writing
courses, high school English, and elementary school
interdisciplinary subjects.
A special chapter highlights the importance and
empowerment of teacher research and how the
da ook a e o e a pla e fo tea he s to e o d
e pe ie e a d ha ge p a ti e (p. 111). Teachers are

An Investigation Into Students Perceptions Of Group Assignments

More Related Content

Similar to An Investigation Into Students Perceptions Of Group Assignments (20)

More from Jennifer Daniel (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

An Investigation Into Students Perceptions Of Group Assignments