Managing Groupbased Coursework in an eLearning environment MAGIC

1
Managing Group-based Coursework in an e-Learning
environment - M²AGIC
Eur Ing Dr Peter Nicholl 31 May 2006
2
Common VLEs

• WebCT
• Blackboard
• Moodle
• Good at Content Delivery and Individual Grade
  Activities

3
Group Enabled Tools
Tools that allow students to review each others
work and give a grade
WebCOM - ACM Journal of Educational Resources in
Computing, Vol. 3, No. 1, March 2003, Article 3.
PG System - Proceedings of the 2003 American
Society for Engineering Education Annual
Conference Exposition 11, 2003, American
Society for Engineering Education
4
Requiremnts Not Met by VLEs

• Group work for large cohorts needs
• Group allocation approaches
• Assignment submission by the group
• Marking of the group
• Feedback to
• Group
• Individual

5
The Magic Wand for Coursework

• M2
• A
• G
• I
• C

anagement and
arking
of
ssessments
for
roups
and
ndividuals
on Large
ohorts
Tool
6
Student Interaction Group Preferences Assignment
Uploads (optional) Peer / Self Evaluation Automate
d Feedback
Assignments Individual and / or Group related
M²AGIC Server
Lecturer Interaction Group Creation Assignment
Marking / Recording Review of Students
Evaluations Feedback
Students
Choice of components from the system to use
Lecturer
7
Marking

• Lecturer created marking criteria
• View submissions
• Mark
• Comment

8
M2AGIC

• Lecturer control for the group allocation process
  
• Using Belbin (profiling) or
• Student Lead Reporting of Team Selection method
• Full audit information to allow tracking of an
  individual student's progress through a course
• Bonus marks can automatically be allocated for
  completing tasks on time
• Typical information on each group member
• Photograph
• Personal statements
• Mobile numbers
• Alternate email addresses

9

Magic Users
10
Peer Contribution Approaches Spark (open source
project - comments)

• Group projects aren't fair !
• Students common complaint
• Equal marks for unequal contributions
• 'Free-riders' known also as 'social loafers' and
  'passengers' not penalised
• Better students inadequately rewarded and
  de-motivated
• Staff common concerns
• Staff dilemma of developing collaboration and
  peer learning without undesirable side effects
• Paper-based attempts in self and peer assessment
  unable to overcome confidentiality concerns
• Paper-based self and peer assessment impossible
  workload if large classes (i.e. huge data
  collection, collation and calculations)

11
(No Transcript)
12
Peer Contribution Approaches

• CHENG MARTIN, Making a Difference using peers
  to assess individual students contributions to a
  group project, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol.
  5, No. 2, 2000

13
Team Contribution

• Evaluation of
• Self
• Peers
• Numerically
• Statement
• Scale

14
Feedback

• Student submitted confidential peer and
  self-evaluation

Team Mark
Evaluation
Personal Feedback
Mark modification
15
Nursing Evaluation

• 61 evaluation forms were returned out of a
  possible 70
•  
• Use of Magic to Create Groups
• 51/61 felt it was a fair and effective way to
  organise groups, making comments like
• Able to interact with people we wouldn't normally
  work with
• Easy way to assign oneself to a group
• Good idea to create groups outside of ones normal
  social circles
• Choosing people with different skills helped in
  forming different opinions
• Good for team building
• Gave the opportunity to select groups and meet a
  wider range of people
•  
• 5/61 were less happy.
• 3 felt they did not get the selection they
  requested
• 2 thought magic was not beneficial and would
  rather have self-selection for groups

16
Nursing Evaluation

• Attitudes to Peer and Self Evaluation
• 48/61 felt it was a good idea making the comments
  below
• Good way to analyse information contributions
  made by peers.
• No problems as long as scores can be justified.
• Useful.
• Worked well with effective groups.
• Helped to be able to give scores corresponding to
  levels of contributions.
• Allowed you to compare yourself with others.
• Fears of consequences if comments made about
  those who did not contribute.
• Positive feedback a motivator helps
  pinpoint areas for professional development.
• Helped me to be more assertive.
• A good learning opportunity to evaluate self and
  peers.
• Rather do this than have a lecturer give me a
  mark.
•  
• 4 Were very uncomfortable with the process.
• 3 Didn't assess as they didn't want to offend.
• 1 Felt it very hard to judge others.
• 1 More guidance needed as peers just give each
  other good marks. 
•  

17
(No Transcript)
18
Ehancements

• Received 5,000 HE funding to develop
• Java application capable of 10,000 simultaneous
  connections
• Integration to WebCT Vista
• Use of components of selected stages