Group assessments are assignments in which multiple students participate collectively to demonstrate their knowledge, skills, and abilities in the completion of a task. This form of assessment aim to evaluate students' individual competencies as well as their ability to collaborate, communicate and solve problems as a team.
Well designed group assessments can ensure that its authentic, collaborative benefits are realised.
They are often used to simulate real-world scenarios where teamwork is essential.
Benefits of Group Assessments
Group assessments, as a form of cooperative learning, can provide many benefits to students.
- Especially for first-year students, it is a great way to get to know their peers and reduce their sense of isolation.
- It further allows to assess students' interpersonal skills such as teamwork, collaborative and organisational and time-management skills.
- As group and teamwork are common practices in professional settings, it also makes assessments more authentic, inclusive, and allows for multi-disciplinary learning.
- Keep in mind that, while group assessments can lower the workload of grading, managing and guiding group work may require more time than grading individual assignments.
Designing Group Assessments: Things to Consider
Group assessments need clear instructions, specific rubrics, and marking guidelines. Explain to students the assessment criteria, both group-based and individual.
Not every assessment is suitable for group work. When considering the use of group assessments, contemplate the following points:
- Is the group component related to the unit learning outcomes?
For example, is effective social interaction or communication a learning outcome? - Is the assessment task more complex than individual students can manage?
For example, is the extent of research required more than a single student could do for an individual assessment? - Does the assessment task imply collaboration? Can the tasks be shared effectively?
- How will the assessment be assessed? Individually AND group/ group only/ individually only?
Remember, as per Macquarie University's Assessment Policy, a maximum of 30% of the total unit mark can be assessed as group work, while 70% of the total marks in a unit must be attributable to a student's individual performance in the unit.
We recommend spending time before the groups are formed explaining to students the benefits and value of the group assessment task, how it is assessed against the relevant learning outcomes, and how working in teams prepares them for working in professional settings.
Challenges and Considerations
Effective group assessments require clear objectives, an equitable distribution of work, and criteria that reflect both individual contributions and the collective outcome.
When allocating groups, you can either let students self-select their groups or randomly allocate them with the group functions. Groups can easily be set up using auto-create for random allocation, can be allocated manually, or students can choose vie the choice tool. There are pros and cons to each allocating model you can read further here.
If you need help in setting up groups or group choices, contact us via artslandt@mq.edu.au
It is easier to manage small groups than larger ones, but groups of two or three run the risk of ending up in pairs (or individuals) if group members drop out or don't contribute.
Ideally, groups should be diverse and contain a mix of students in studied disciplines, backgrounds, local and international students, year levels... although to be honest, this isn't always easy to achieve...
Marking and Assessing Group Work
Typically, three distinct methods are employed to assign grades for group tasks, namely:
- Individual grades, where each member is evaluated separately
- Weighted grades, where grades are distributed based on individual contributions.
- Same grades, where all members receive the same grade
Whichever grading method you choose, remember that according to the university's Assessment Procedures, 70% of the total mark for a unit must be attributed to individual student performance. That means a group task weighted 30% or less can be assessed as a group and assigned as group mark only. However, if a group task is weighted more than 30%, or there are multiple group tasks that sum up to more than 30%, sufficient marks must be attributed to the individual student to ensure that 70% of the total available mark for a unit remains attributable to individual student performance.
Individual grades
Some prefer evaluating group members on an individual basis. With this approach, each participant is graded on their own contribution, which could be either a complete work, such as a report or paper, or a portion of a collective project that they have completed. Here, the purpose of forming groups is mainly to consolidate resources for communal use, such as data and research materials. Additionally, groups serve to offer peer support and promote cooperation and communication among students.
Individual assessing is seen by students as more effective, including advantages such as:
- Reduced reliance on peers
- Perceived fairness
- Minimal need for editing
- Fewer conflicts
- Decreased number of grievances
However, despite student contentment, the individual assessment method does have the following weak points:
- It discourages collaborative efforts
- Group commitment may wane
- Regular meetings become less appealing
- Reports may end up being too similar, raising concerns about plagiarism
- The workload for marking increases
- Competition may arise within the group, leading to a reluctance to share resources and ideas
Weighted grades
Another method, probably more equitable, is to use a combination of group and individual marks. Students receive a combination of a shared and an individual mark. Usually, the shared component (the actual total outcome of the assessment) is weighted higher and the individual component acts as a supplementary mark (not more than 20%).
Unit convenors should assign individual marks based on quantifiable criteria rather than personal observations or hearsay within the group. For instance, marks for individual effort should reflect tangible proof rather than the tutor’s impressions or remarks from other students. If a student reports a conflict with a peer, it shouldn’t influence the assessment of the involved parties’ efforts. Given that markers aren’t privy to all group interactions, it’s not always appropriate for them to determine the full individual score.
Incorporating peer review can address this issue. This approach might involve a variety of activities such as team rankings, individual self-assessments, personal reflections, and evaluations of the group’s dynamics, all aimed at fairly assessing each member’s contribution to the collective work.
As with all grading methods, it is crucial to work with clearly defined rubrics that make clear how and what work is assessed as a group or individually.
The weighted marking system, like any evaluation method, comes with its own set of pros and cons. Its advantages include:
- Students generally view it as equitable.
- It reduces the likelihood of members not contributing.
- It fosters skill acquisition, as students are motivated to learn and apply the skills they’ll be assessed on.
On the flip side, the system’s disadvantages are:
- It can be burdensome and time-intensive for tutors and convenors to manage.
- There’s a tendency for students to assign uniform marks to all group members.
- It may lead to situations where students influence others for higher marks.
- It’s susceptible to partiality and prejudicial treatment.
Same grades
An alternative assessment method for group work involves giving all members the same grade. In this approach, the group submits a single collective work, and the resulting grade is shared equally among members. This system is based on the principle that all group members should contribute to every aspect of the task and be evaluated as one unit, thus promoting complete interdependence.
The benefits of this grading method are:
- It reduces the number of assignments to grade, potentially improving the quality of evaluation and feedback.
- It encourages better coordination and collaboration within the group.
- It fosters a stronger sense of interdependency among group members.
However, this method is not without its drawbacks, disadvantages are:
- It can be seen as unfair by students, especially if contributions are unequal.
- It may lead to more disputes and task allocation issues.
- It can create an over-reliance among group members on one another.