Wikis google docs

Peer Assessment of Collaborative Work Supported by Wikis and Google docs

Jože Rugelj ([email protected])Irena Nančovska Šerbec ([email protected])

University of LjubljanaSlovenia

Rugelj, N. Šerbec JTEL 2010 2

Survey

Introduction Collaborative learning Educational assessment (self and

peer assessment) Handout activities Conclusion

http://hrast.pef.uni-lj.si/moodle/


Purpose

We present a form of wiki/google docs supported collaborative learning followed by collaborative and peer assessment.


What do we expect?


Introduction

Importance of active learning Collaborative knowledge construction

Wikis/Google docs Peer assessment

Experience Faculty of Education, University of

Ljubljana future computer science teachers. first year students course on Introduction to the Internet


Introduction

The acquisition of skills and competences for collaborative work and assessment are highly desired in the education of teachers.

To develop the skills and competencies required for teaching, students have to reflect on their own behaviour.

Rugelj, N. Šerbec JTEL 2010

Collaborative knowledge construction

In the past: teacher assigned a learning activity that is carried out autonomously by the student Learning process -> low amount of social

dimension.

Efficient learning: collaborative learning as a situation in which two or more people learn or attempt to learn something together, Creating the conditions for individual cognitive

development as a result of group interaction



In networked collaborative learning, assigning a group of students with the task of: collaboratively discovering the solution to a given

problem (collaborative problem- solving) or developing a written text (co-writing) based on a given

argument (wikis, Google docs),



Wiki unique and powerful

information-sharing

redistribution of responsibility to all group members;

collaboration in the various stages

evaluation and monitoring of activities: comments, linkers, tags, versioning

Google docs free, web-based word

processor

data storage

used to create and edit documents online while collaborating in real-time with other users

versioning (revisions)



Teachers often experience difficulty in evaluation students contributions involved in co-writing activities: the level of learning produced by the process itself gauging the actual degree to which the individual has

actively participated in and contributed to the shared written work .

Qualitative and quantitative factors which influence the assessment

10


AssessmentEducational assessment is the process of documenting, usually

in measurable terms, knowledge, skills, attitudes and beliefs.

(wikipedia)


Assessment

What do we expect?


Assessment of the 21st Century

http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/21st+Century+Assessment

Allowing students input into the development of the assessment is a key step to achieving student ownership and engagement.


Educational Assessment

Self-, peer- and co-assessment refer to activities of learners in which they evaluate their own results of work and those of their peers with similar learning backgrounds. Coassessment -> assessment of the project

Peer assessment is a process where students consider and specify the level or quality of a result or performance of other students within the group. Peer-assessment -> assessment of individual’s

contribution in the group. Criteria which reflect quality and quantity of

individual’s contribution.


Educational assessment

Expected advantages (Sluijsmans, 1999) :1. Students' feelings of ownership for their own

learning2. Students’ motivation students and encouragement3. Assessment - shared activity rather than a lone one4. Promotes genuine interchange of ideas5. Leads to more directed and effective learning6. Autonomy in learning7. Students’ judgments are respected8. Transferable personal skills9. Community of learning in which students feel that they

have influence and involvement10.Reduces teachers workload11.Make students think more deeply…


Educational assessment

Questions: Do students feel uncomfortable when evaluating

their peers? Can students can give honest and fair assessment? Is peer assessment reliable, valid?

Reliability is defined as "an indication of the consistency of scores across evaluators or over time.”

Validity is defined as "an indication of how well an assessment actually measures what it is supposed to measure”

wikipedia What did we measure?

agreement with teacher judgments? agreement with an objective criterion?


Handout activities

Topic of collaborative learning:ICT in the schools

Go to Moodle: http://hrast.pef.uni-lj.si/moodle/ JTEL10 course

Collaborative editing of wiki/google_docs with peer assessment Wikis in Moodle Google docs JTEL10 Ohrid 1..3

Peer assessment in the JTEL10 workshop


Assessment of collab. learning

Sem_grade=70% project grade + 30% peer_ass_in_the_group

project grade=co_wiki+t_wiki

Criteria for project (intergroup) evaluation:

•quality of result•adequacy of topic descriptions (adequacy)•clarity/structure

Scaled from 0 to 10.

We combine teachers (t_*) and grades of peers for collaboration (co_*)

Criteria for intragroup evaluation:

•quality of individual contribution•“fresh” ideas•motivating for collaboration

Scale -4, -2, 0, 2, 4. average level = 0 (member_i)=0


Assessment of collab. learning

Research questions How the individual wiki/google_docs

grade is related to other grades achieved for particular seminar works (learning activities) and writing examination?

How the co-assessment grade is related to teachers grade?

Which criteria for individual wiki/google_docs assessment is the most important?


Experience at Faculty of Education

Peer-and co-assessment / teacher’s gradeWhich criteria for individual wiki assessment arethe most important?


Experience at Faculty of Education

The individual wiki grade is strongly correlated with teacher ratings.

Punctuality and criteria that estimates whether the member stimulated and contributed to the effectiveness of work within the group are the most correlated to individual wikis grade.

These criteria are related to qualitative properties of project work.

Quantitative data, such as frequency of editing, are not strongly correlated to individual’s contribution assessment in wikis.


Further work

Finish the project work in wikis/google_docs

Evaluate other projects in the Moodle workshop (http://hrast.pef.uni-lj.si/moodle )

Evaluation how different ICT supported environments influence the assessment of project work.


Peer review in the scientific world