SlideShare a Scribd company logo
Institute for Learning Innovation
and Development
Fair shares for all?
The role of peer feedback
in group assignments
Adam Warren
a.j.warren@soton.ac.uk
TEAMMATES
 https://teammatesv4.appspot.com
 Instructor account requires Google account
2
The aim is to encourage and develop
good team skills
3
Formative feedback
on teamwork criteria
4
Peer feedback on
contribution to group project
5
Rewarding contributions
but the average remains the same
6
63%
51% 68% 63% 70%
+7+0+5-12
MANG1017 Business Skills
 First year, second semester option
 200 students
 Assessment: group project report
 12 supervision classes (16-20 students)
 50 teams of 4 students?
7
First formative feedback
 After two weeks – 154/202 (76%)
8
65.5
52.7
62.1
59.9
31.7
40.2
34.9
39.0
2.7
7.0
3.1
1.2
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Participation in class discussions
Communication outside class
Organising and planning work
Being helpful to other team members
Excellent Good Needs improvement
Second formative feedback
 After six weeks – 145/202 (72%)
9
51
42
5
3
51
39
7
2
54
38
5
3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
This student is making a significant contribution to the project's deliverables.
This student is making a significant contribution to the leadership or organisation of the project
This student makes a significant contribution to the class discussions
Summative feedback
 Immediately after submission of report
 Anonymous
 20% penalty for non-completion (9 students)
10
Please divide 100 points between all
members of your team in proportion to their
overall contribution to the work.
Group project report
80%
Individual & collective research 20%
Clarity of analytical thought 20%
Specific recommendations 20%
Referencing and presentation 20%
Attendance and contribution to in-class discussion:
tutor will award up to 15%
Using TEAMMATES to give feedback 3 times = 5%
40%
The individual grade
for each report will
be scaled by the
feedback from the
other members of
each group.
Grade calculations
60%
20% penalty for
anyone who didn’t
submit the
summative peer
feedback
How to distribute 100 points
 Suppose your group has four members, including yourself.
If you thought that everyone did an equal share of the work then you would
award 25 points each.
 Suppose you thought that yourself and one other person put in more effort and
gave yourself an extra 10 for a total of 35, then the points might be 35, 35, 15
and 15 – but is that fair? Did you really contribute more than twice as much as
someone who only got 15?
 How about 30, 30, 20, 20? Does that seem fairer?
 Did the other strong team member actually do a bit more than you?
So 33, 27, 20, 20?
 Did the two weaker team members do the same?
How about 33, 27, 22, 18?
 If you have awarded someone more than twice or less than half their equal
share of the points, please give your reasons
12
Impact of peer feedback on score
17
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 110
Scores by mark band
raw project scores individual modified scores
Average 57.6%
Median 60.0%
SD 16.7
Impact of peer feedback on score
18
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 110
Scores by mark band
raw project scores individual modified scores
Average 57.6%
Median 60.0%
SD 16.7
Average 57.8%
Median 61.6%
SD 21.2
Impact of peer feedback on grades
19
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Zero Fail 3rd 2/2 2/1 First
Scores by grade
raw project scores individual modified scores
Were students fair?
20
Students awarding themselves: Average
more than 10 points more 10 13.1
5-10 points more 29 7.4
up to 5 points more 103 2.6
the same 17 0.0
up to 5 points less 38 -0.8
5-10 points less 0
more than 10 points less 0
Within 3 points of average 103 55%
2 of the 50 groups awarded equal shares
Dealing with unfairness
 One student awarded herself 40 and her three
teammates 20 each
 Her teammates all awarded her 20 or less
 We adjusted her points to equal shares: 25
points each
21
Groups of one
 Group of two – e.g. assignment score 57%
– Student A = 120, student B = 80
– Individual grades are 61% and 52%
 Group of one – e.g. assignment score 57%
– No reward for challenge of solo project
 We decided to use a factor of 133
– So this student’s grade is 65%
22
Next steps
 Student evaluation survey:
– Did they think their grades were fair?
– Did they act on the formative feedback?
– Their thoughts on assigning 100 points
 Further data analysis and correlation
 Presentation at ALT-C in September
 Fine-tune process for next year!
23
TEAMMATES doing its job!
24
Student to tutor:
Hi, I've given everyone an equal 20 in my group but
I fear other will favour themselves and give
themselves an extra 5-10, and I will get less marks.
This system favours people being slightly biased to
themselves, enough so that they don't get picked up
on. I fear people won’t be as fair as I have been.
TEAMMATES doing its job!
25
Tutor to student:
With feedback comes a level of anxiety for
everyone. The system we are using spots patterns
in groups so strong gaming is identified.
We of course also look at the feedback from class
tutors as well as feedback from students so there
are checks and balances in the system.
TEAMMATES doing its job!
26
His feedback scores:
[student 1] = 20 (12.0) – weak student
[student 2] = 4 (29.2) – team with 4
[self score] = 20 (11.6)
[student 4] = 4 (29.0) – team with 2
[student 5] = 10 (18.2)
TEAMMATES doing its job!
27
Student 2 feedback comment:
He showed up to one meeting outside class, and in
class was always late and distracting from the group
work. His part of the project was entirely rewritten
by myself and [student] as it was incoherent and
had not answered the question.
TEAMMATES doing its job!
28
Student 4 feedback comment:
He showed up to one meeting and his submission
had to be totally rewritten as it was incoherent and
had not addressed the question at hand, he did not
attend the group session to help right this, he
showed no effort what so ever.

More Related Content

PDF
38585340 grievance-questionnaire
PPT
Radio project group report 2011 12
PPTX
ELP_SNP2016 - Rev 061416
PDF
Psychology final project report
DOCX
English 2 - Project 2 - Research Assignment Report Writing
PPTX
DCMI/RDA Task Group Report, DC-2010 Pittsburgh
PPT
Communities of Practice: Conversations To Collaboration
PPT
Characteristics Of High Performance Teams
38585340 grievance-questionnaire
Radio project group report 2011 12
ELP_SNP2016 - Rev 061416
Psychology final project report
English 2 - Project 2 - Research Assignment Report Writing
DCMI/RDA Task Group Report, DC-2010 Pittsburgh
Communities of Practice: Conversations To Collaboration
Characteristics Of High Performance Teams

Viewers also liked (19)

PPTX
Embracing local devolution - two college's intriguing insights into respondin...
PPTX
Perspectives on implementing a vision for developing staff digital capability
PPTX
An evolution of Vscene in action - John Wilson
PPTX
Learning analytics for FE colleges
PPT
Inclusively enhancing learning from lecture recordings: using Synote without ...
PPTX
Making best use of technology for employability: the Jisc employability toolkit
PPTX
An evolution of Vscene in action - Tim Boundy
PPTX
Institutional visions for a digital student experience
PPTX
Increasing student satisfaction by closing the feedback loop
PPTX
Exploiting digital collections in learning, teaching and research
PPTX
Transforming organisational culture
PPTX
Amazon Web Services
PPTX
Digital technology is fundamentally changing learning and teaching in higher ...
PPTX
Evidence-based practice in technology-enhanced learning
PPTX
Learning and exploring with new technology at Dundee and Angus College
PPTX
Doing better things: transforming how we use Turnitin for learning
PPTX
Are you future ready? Preparing students for living and working in a digital ...
PPTX
Attendance monitoring in higher education
PPTX
Are you future ready? Preparing students for living and working in a digital ...
Embracing local devolution - two college's intriguing insights into respondin...
Perspectives on implementing a vision for developing staff digital capability
An evolution of Vscene in action - John Wilson
Learning analytics for FE colleges
Inclusively enhancing learning from lecture recordings: using Synote without ...
Making best use of technology for employability: the Jisc employability toolkit
An evolution of Vscene in action - Tim Boundy
Institutional visions for a digital student experience
Increasing student satisfaction by closing the feedback loop
Exploiting digital collections in learning, teaching and research
Transforming organisational culture
Amazon Web Services
Digital technology is fundamentally changing learning and teaching in higher ...
Evidence-based practice in technology-enhanced learning
Learning and exploring with new technology at Dundee and Angus College
Doing better things: transforming how we use Turnitin for learning
Are you future ready? Preparing students for living and working in a digital ...
Attendance monitoring in higher education
Are you future ready? Preparing students for living and working in a digital ...
Ad

Similar to Fair Shares for all? The role of peer feedback in group assignments (20)

PPTX
Effective feedback and staff well-being twilight
PPT
Book Launch: Designing effective feedback processes
PPTX
Assessing learning outcomes in classroom
PPT
RIDE 2010 presentation - Using peer assessment to close the feedback gap
PDF
Effective feedback
PPTX
Inclusive feedback project
PDF
Peer assessment in Moodle - Leona Norris, Alison Sands, Helen Young, Caroline...
PPTX
Peer feedback in Higher Education
PPTX
Effective feedback
PPTX
Marking for outstanding impact
PPTX
TESTA, SIAST Universities of Regina & Saskathewan Webinar (November 2013)
PPTX
Fraser and Cole
PPTX
Peer evaluations, peer critiques and custom projects course technology comp...
PDF
CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS
PPTX
New Options for Online Student Feedback
PPTX
Perceptions of Feedback: Myth & Reality
PPT
Anne Cunningham Sunderland event April 10
PPT
Sunderland event - Dr Anne Cunningham
PPTX
TESTA, Presentation to the SDG Course Leaders, University of West of Scotlan...
PPTX
Amy Lund
Effective feedback and staff well-being twilight
Book Launch: Designing effective feedback processes
Assessing learning outcomes in classroom
RIDE 2010 presentation - Using peer assessment to close the feedback gap
Effective feedback
Inclusive feedback project
Peer assessment in Moodle - Leona Norris, Alison Sands, Helen Young, Caroline...
Peer feedback in Higher Education
Effective feedback
Marking for outstanding impact
TESTA, SIAST Universities of Regina & Saskathewan Webinar (November 2013)
Fraser and Cole
Peer evaluations, peer critiques and custom projects course technology comp...
CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS
New Options for Online Student Feedback
Perceptions of Feedback: Myth & Reality
Anne Cunningham Sunderland event April 10
Sunderland event - Dr Anne Cunningham
TESTA, Presentation to the SDG Course Leaders, University of West of Scotlan...
Amy Lund
Ad

Recently uploaded (20)

PDF
OBE - B.A.(HON'S) IN INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE -Ar.MOHIUDDIN.pdf
PDF
David L Page_DCI Research Study Journey_how Methodology can inform one's prac...
PDF
HVAC Specification 2024 according to central public works department
PPTX
History, Philosophy and sociology of education (1).pptx
PPTX
Chinmaya Tiranga Azadi Quiz (Class 7-8 )
PDF
Chinmaya Tiranga quiz Grand Finale.pdf
PDF
Black Hat USA 2025 - Micro ICS Summit - ICS/OT Threat Landscape
PPTX
Virtual and Augmented Reality in Current Scenario
PDF
Paper A Mock Exam 9_ Attempt review.pdf.
PDF
A GUIDE TO GENETICS FOR UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS
PPTX
Onco Emergencies - Spinal cord compression Superior vena cava syndrome Febr...
PDF
Empowerment Technology for Senior High School Guide
PDF
My India Quiz Book_20210205121199924.pdf
PDF
CISA (Certified Information Systems Auditor) Domain-Wise Summary.pdf
PPTX
CHAPTER IV. MAN AND BIOSPHERE AND ITS TOTALITY.pptx
PDF
Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment .pdf
PDF
BP 704 T. NOVEL DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS (UNIT 1)
PDF
ChatGPT for Dummies - Pam Baker Ccesa007.pdf
PDF
FOISHS ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2025.pdf
PDF
Weekly quiz Compilation Jan -July 25.pdf
OBE - B.A.(HON'S) IN INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE -Ar.MOHIUDDIN.pdf
David L Page_DCI Research Study Journey_how Methodology can inform one's prac...
HVAC Specification 2024 according to central public works department
History, Philosophy and sociology of education (1).pptx
Chinmaya Tiranga Azadi Quiz (Class 7-8 )
Chinmaya Tiranga quiz Grand Finale.pdf
Black Hat USA 2025 - Micro ICS Summit - ICS/OT Threat Landscape
Virtual and Augmented Reality in Current Scenario
Paper A Mock Exam 9_ Attempt review.pdf.
A GUIDE TO GENETICS FOR UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS
Onco Emergencies - Spinal cord compression Superior vena cava syndrome Febr...
Empowerment Technology for Senior High School Guide
My India Quiz Book_20210205121199924.pdf
CISA (Certified Information Systems Auditor) Domain-Wise Summary.pdf
CHAPTER IV. MAN AND BIOSPHERE AND ITS TOTALITY.pptx
Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment .pdf
BP 704 T. NOVEL DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS (UNIT 1)
ChatGPT for Dummies - Pam Baker Ccesa007.pdf
FOISHS ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 2025.pdf
Weekly quiz Compilation Jan -July 25.pdf

Fair Shares for all? The role of peer feedback in group assignments

  • 1. Institute for Learning Innovation and Development Fair shares for all? The role of peer feedback in group assignments Adam Warren a.j.warren@soton.ac.uk
  • 3. The aim is to encourage and develop good team skills 3
  • 5. Peer feedback on contribution to group project 5
  • 6. Rewarding contributions but the average remains the same 6 63% 51% 68% 63% 70% +7+0+5-12
  • 7. MANG1017 Business Skills  First year, second semester option  200 students  Assessment: group project report  12 supervision classes (16-20 students)  50 teams of 4 students? 7
  • 8. First formative feedback  After two weeks – 154/202 (76%) 8 65.5 52.7 62.1 59.9 31.7 40.2 34.9 39.0 2.7 7.0 3.1 1.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Participation in class discussions Communication outside class Organising and planning work Being helpful to other team members Excellent Good Needs improvement
  • 9. Second formative feedback  After six weeks – 145/202 (72%) 9 51 42 5 3 51 39 7 2 54 38 5 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree This student is making a significant contribution to the project's deliverables. This student is making a significant contribution to the leadership or organisation of the project This student makes a significant contribution to the class discussions
  • 10. Summative feedback  Immediately after submission of report  Anonymous  20% penalty for non-completion (9 students) 10 Please divide 100 points between all members of your team in proportion to their overall contribution to the work.
  • 11. Group project report 80% Individual & collective research 20% Clarity of analytical thought 20% Specific recommendations 20% Referencing and presentation 20% Attendance and contribution to in-class discussion: tutor will award up to 15% Using TEAMMATES to give feedback 3 times = 5% 40% The individual grade for each report will be scaled by the feedback from the other members of each group. Grade calculations 60% 20% penalty for anyone who didn’t submit the summative peer feedback
  • 12. How to distribute 100 points  Suppose your group has four members, including yourself. If you thought that everyone did an equal share of the work then you would award 25 points each.  Suppose you thought that yourself and one other person put in more effort and gave yourself an extra 10 for a total of 35, then the points might be 35, 35, 15 and 15 – but is that fair? Did you really contribute more than twice as much as someone who only got 15?  How about 30, 30, 20, 20? Does that seem fairer?  Did the other strong team member actually do a bit more than you? So 33, 27, 20, 20?  Did the two weaker team members do the same? How about 33, 27, 22, 18?  If you have awarded someone more than twice or less than half their equal share of the points, please give your reasons 12
  • 13. Impact of peer feedback on score 17 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 110 Scores by mark band raw project scores individual modified scores Average 57.6% Median 60.0% SD 16.7
  • 14. Impact of peer feedback on score 18 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 110 Scores by mark band raw project scores individual modified scores Average 57.6% Median 60.0% SD 16.7 Average 57.8% Median 61.6% SD 21.2
  • 15. Impact of peer feedback on grades 19 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Zero Fail 3rd 2/2 2/1 First Scores by grade raw project scores individual modified scores
  • 16. Were students fair? 20 Students awarding themselves: Average more than 10 points more 10 13.1 5-10 points more 29 7.4 up to 5 points more 103 2.6 the same 17 0.0 up to 5 points less 38 -0.8 5-10 points less 0 more than 10 points less 0 Within 3 points of average 103 55% 2 of the 50 groups awarded equal shares
  • 17. Dealing with unfairness  One student awarded herself 40 and her three teammates 20 each  Her teammates all awarded her 20 or less  We adjusted her points to equal shares: 25 points each 21
  • 18. Groups of one  Group of two – e.g. assignment score 57% – Student A = 120, student B = 80 – Individual grades are 61% and 52%  Group of one – e.g. assignment score 57% – No reward for challenge of solo project  We decided to use a factor of 133 – So this student’s grade is 65% 22
  • 19. Next steps  Student evaluation survey: – Did they think their grades were fair? – Did they act on the formative feedback? – Their thoughts on assigning 100 points  Further data analysis and correlation  Presentation at ALT-C in September  Fine-tune process for next year! 23
  • 20. TEAMMATES doing its job! 24 Student to tutor: Hi, I've given everyone an equal 20 in my group but I fear other will favour themselves and give themselves an extra 5-10, and I will get less marks. This system favours people being slightly biased to themselves, enough so that they don't get picked up on. I fear people won’t be as fair as I have been.
  • 21. TEAMMATES doing its job! 25 Tutor to student: With feedback comes a level of anxiety for everyone. The system we are using spots patterns in groups so strong gaming is identified. We of course also look at the feedback from class tutors as well as feedback from students so there are checks and balances in the system.
  • 22. TEAMMATES doing its job! 26 His feedback scores: [student 1] = 20 (12.0) – weak student [student 2] = 4 (29.2) – team with 4 [self score] = 20 (11.6) [student 4] = 4 (29.0) – team with 2 [student 5] = 10 (18.2)
  • 23. TEAMMATES doing its job! 27 Student 2 feedback comment: He showed up to one meeting outside class, and in class was always late and distracting from the group work. His part of the project was entirely rewritten by myself and [student] as it was incoherent and had not answered the question.
  • 24. TEAMMATES doing its job! 28 Student 4 feedback comment: He showed up to one meeting and his submission had to be totally rewritten as it was incoherent and had not addressed the question at hand, he did not attend the group session to help right this, he showed no effort what so ever.

Editor's Notes

  • #8: Created teams too soon – during first two weeks students left and joined course or swapped classes due to ‘timetable clashes’ Some teams needed to be reconfigured as some students never attended, or not until later in the semester But TEAMMATES did make this fairly easy to manage technically
  • #9: After two weeks – but teams not yet settled Decided not to make this feedback anonymous - students should take ownership of their feedback - anonymous poor feedback can erode trust
  • #10: New focus on CONTRIBUTION to project Also not anonymous
  • #11: One week to complete feedback. Students do not get to see the results of this 21 non-completers – but 12 of those had left the course, so 9 students penalised Reminder emails sent to all non-completers mid-week and one-day before deadline. Individual reminders to a few.
  • #12: How much should the peer feedback influence the overall grade? For the pilot we guessed 40% and will carefully evaluate the impact
  • #18: Normal distribution around upper second grade boundary
  • #20: Students who gained points were more likely to cross a grade boundary than those who lost points