Individual Grade Determination
Determining an individual’s score from a group project is not an easy task, which is why many teachers award everyone in the group with the same score. This method is grossly unfair and leads to social loafing and student disharmony.
Peer Assess Pro (PAP) uses structured peer feedback to calculate an individual’s score. PAP offers teachers four different methods for determining individual scores from a team-based project. The following are the two most popular methods.
Peer Assessed (PA) Score
|What is it:||A relative measure of the degree to which a team member has contributed to their team’s overall achievement, team processes, and leadership.|
|Best application for use:||This score was developed for teachers who are using Team-Based Learning in their classrooms.|
|Advantages||Very easily calculated from the sum of the components of the Peer Ratings for each of the ten component. High face validity. This is useful information to provide students to show how they are rated by their team members irrespective of the Team Result.|
|Disadvantages||Takes no account of the Team Result.|
|How is it calculated:||The PA score is calculated for each team member directly from their Average Team Contribution (ATC) and Average Leadership Contribution (ALC).|
PA = (5/4) x (ATC-1 + ALC-1) => 12.5 x (ATC + ALC -2). This formula creates values ranging from 0 to 100 because ATC and ALC each range from 1 through 5, a spread of 4. The (-1) in the formula corrects for the fact that the rating scales in the Peer Assess Pro Survey use a scale of 1 through 5.
Example: If a student receives an ATC of 3.34 and ALC of 4.6 the PA Score = 12.5 x (3.3 + 4.6 – 2) => 12.5 x 5.9 => 73.75.
Normalised Personal Result (NPR)
|What is it:||The Normalised Personal Result method awards the AVERAGE student in the team the ‘Team Result’. All remaining students are awarded a personal result above or below the Team Result depending on whether their Team-Based Learning score is above or below that team’s average Team-Based Learning score.|
|Best application for use:||The NPR is the preferred method for determining individual scores from a team assignment. It effectively rewards those students who contribute more to the project than the others and penalises the social loafers.|
|Advantages||Similar to the Rank-Based Method, but more flexible. Specifically, the teacher has precise control over how much spread will be applied to the entire class’s marks, according to the Spread Factor selected. A key feature is that, in most cases, the Average Mark of a team’s NPR marks will equal the Team Result mark. Furthermore, the Standard Deviation of the team’s NPR marks will equal a multiple of the team’s standard deviation calculated by the IPR method. Note that team and individual marks at the extreme ends (near zero or 100) will be clipped to no less than zero, or no more than 100. This clipping will affect the Target SD and Team Average IPR for the teams with clipped results. As the Spread Factor is increased upwards from the default value of 2, then the spread of marks tends towards approximating those calculated by the RPR method.|
|Disadvantages||A more complicated calculation to explain to people.|
|How is it calculated:||NPR = Team Result + Correction Factor(IPR)|
Team Result = the teacher’s mark assigned to the team’s results.
Spread Factor = a factor chosen by the teacher that will S T R E T C H each team’s intrinsic spread of marks, as measured by the team’s standard deviation of IPR marks. The default Spread Factor is 1.0. The effect is illustrated visually in Figure A.1.
IPR = the student’s specific IPR, calculated as per Method 1.
Team Average IPR = The average of the team’s IPR marks, for the specific team.