After reading this article that claims students say, “No more group assignments—at least not until you figure out how to fairly grade each student’s individual contributions,” I thought I would share my process for grading group work. It’s fair, it’s been hugely successful, and it’s the most accurate way I’ve been able to determine who did what work on a group project. Most students love it, only a few have disliked it (usually the social loafers), and – in my opinion – it’s an important skill-building exercise. Here it is, for what it’s worth …
1. Group Mark: This is the usual group mark; the mark earned on a project, paper, presentation, etc. For example, let’s say a group of 4 members earned 16/20 on their presentation project. Their group mark is 16. Most often educators stop here, but I don’t think it tells enough of the story. So …
2. Total Group Points: Then they determined this by multiplying the group mark by the number of members in the group. Continuing with the example, the group mark of 16 is multiplied by the 4 group members giving us 64 Total Group Pts (4 x 16 = 64).
3. Prepare Fractions: Then on a piece of paper, I have the students write a fraction beside every group member’s name, leaving the numerator blank and using the same denominator as the group mark. For example:
- Stan = /20
- Susan = /20
- Joe = /20
- Tanya = /20
- Total Group Pts = 80
4. Group Negotiates Individual Marks: Then the group works out – on their own – who should get how many of the total group points. I ask them to review what went well and what didn’t, and have them use that information – on their own – to decide how to allocate their total group points. They cannot use more or less than the total number of group points they earned, some members may earn up to 105%, and it’s up to them to present their cases to their group mates as to why each member should get what they should get.
For example, lets say Stan was ‘the man’ and the group agrees their decent mark of 16/20 was largely due to him doing a great job on the most difficult tasks. They agree he should receive 105%, which would look like this:
- Stan = 21/20
- Susan = /20
- Joe = /20
- Tanya = /20
- Total Group Pts Left = 43 (64 – 21 = 43)
Then they move on to Joe, who – the groups agrees – did absolutely nothing in preparing for the presentation (Stan did Joe’s work), but a good job in the actual presentation. The group decides to give Joe 8/20, and we’re left with this:
- Stan = 21/20
- Susan = /20
- Joe = 8/20
- Tanya = /20
- Total Group Pts Left = 35 (43 – 8 = 35)
Finally, Susan says that she and Tanya contributed equally (which is mostly true), but Tanya adds that she was the one who spent a good 30 minutes proofreading everyone’s final work and fixing mistakes. With this, the group decides on the following marks and submits them to their instructor who records them as the individual grades for the group assignment:
- Stan = 21/20
- Susan = 16.5/20
- Joe = 8/20
- Tanya = 18.5/20
- Totals = 64/80
5. Teacher Records the Marks: The teacher, then, does the following things before recording the marks:
- Verifies the numbers add up, ensuring students aren’t trying to add a couple marks here and there (it happens more often than you think, and it always results in group members blaming bad math skills .. he he),
- Ensures that the group generally agrees with the collective decision/allotment, making sure no one was bullied, intimidated or guilted into taking a lower grade than they felt they rightfully deserved.
- Fields questions and assists with any negotiations that become heated, sometimes teaching (or coaching) a group how deliberate on the issue and how to present and listen to points-made calmly and rationally.
Tags: assessment, classroom learning, educational tools, experiential learning, Great Examples, Real World Learning Scenarios, Teaching Ideas
I have used this assessment tool in high school classes and it works really well. The kids loved it, and they loved negotiating for their marks. It kept everyone in the group motivated to work hard and for the students who chose not to contribute as much, they never seemed to put up a fuss about having a lower mark. They were well aware that they didn’t contribute as much and felt it fair (for the most part of course!!) I highly recommend this way to assess group projects, it keeps everyone motivated to do their part.
This looks like a great way to mark groups. I’m going to try it out the first chance I get! I’ve always had an individual component to all my group projects, but it always left me marking something extra for the kids to demonstrate individual contributions (written work, response journals, etc.). I love that this method addresses the issue of individual marks without giving the teacher any extra marking!
I am working in the MYP program where everything is criterion referenced assessment. We do not have tradtional grades and therefore a group might score a 7 on a criterion referenced rubirc with a mximum of 10. Any suggestions for how this way of scoring could be modified for the MYP? One thing I have done in the past if giving the students class time to work on their projects, at the end of each session I give them an accountability page where each person must write down exactly what they did during the work period. All group members must sign the paper at the end of the period stating that they agree that the written statements are indeed true. When I go to mark the final product I look to see if the workload was equally distributed. Works well with Middle School students.
@ Amy: Exactly, people are always more cognizant of their effort (and non-effort) if they know there’s a “judgment day” at the end of it. And, like most teachers who utilize peer evaluations know, students are usually much tougher markers than teachers are. So – especially after doing it the first time – it really does increase the accountability of group work.
@ Teresa re. “extra marking”: I hate doing ‘extra marking’ and find that there are a lot of great ideas out there that I shy away from because of the marking workload. But with respect to group work, in most cases, the students in a group are much better authorities on what got done and by whom than the teachers are. So, to me, it only makes sense that they should be included in the evaluation process. And it’s funny, in my years teaching, the more I’ve included students in the evaluation process (admittedly, sometimes to save myself a bit of marking), the more my students learn. There are lots of reasons for this (which I should assemble into a blog post), but it truly is win-win.
@ Alison re. new idea: Your accountability page idea there sounds outstanding, and something I’d like to try myself. It does, like Teresa pointed out, create a little more work for the teacher, but what I like about it is that it gives the kids (and you) ongoing feedback during the work process. I can see this being especially helpful with middle school kidders who do need to be coached and coaxed much more than high school kids.
@ Alison re. using this with rubrics:You could totally use the method in this post with criterion-based assessments though. Using your example, here’s how I see it working … for what it’s worth:
1. A group of 3 work submit their project to you.
2. You evaluate it and determine its quality matches the “7 description” on the rubric.
3. You return it to the group, and they determine their total group points by going 7 x 3 = 21 (out of a possible 30 total group pts because 3 x 10 = 30).
4. They being to negotiate their marks, ask you to mediate one issue of contention between group members, and mutually agree the marks should look like this:
Johnny: 10/10 Sunny: 5/10 Alisha: 6/10.
5. You check the math and ensure that (10 + 5 + 6) = (3 x 7), you check that everyone in the group agrees that this is fair and a reflection of what went on, and then you record the marks.
Summary: The group, when working as a unit, produced something that you (teacher) figured matched the 7 description (out of a possible 10) on your rubric. The group, however, when asked to think about who rightfully earned how much of those marks, determined that 7/10 for everyone was NOT an accurate reflection of what went on; 10, 5, and 6 was. Hope this example fits the situation you were thinking of.