From my own experiences, in a classroom setting, assessment of participation in a collaborative group is evaluated with a well thought out rubric designed to give students and teachers levels of expectations and criteria for success in a task. I think that participation in a learning community should be assessed in a similar way. Students and instructors must have a mutual understanding of the expectations with open lines of communication so that tasks are completed by everyone in the community. I also think that participation assessment can be achieved by inviting students to assess each other. No professor can really know everything that occurred in a collaborative community unless the professor is one of the members. What better way for participation to be monitored than by the students themselves. According to Siemens (2008), educators and learners can assess each other with a rating scheme.
Varying levels of skill and knowledge helps broaden the learning by inviting members to share information, insight or suggestions that would not be gotten without diversity in the group. I like to think that a rich learning experience is the reward rather than the "mark" assigned at the completion of a task. Siemens (2008) would agree when he says that students learning is assessed with direct comments and feedback from the communities. It is fair to say that the traditional grading with numbers or letters does not satisfy assessment in collaborative communities. According to Swan (2004), "ongoing assessment of student performance is linked to immediate feedback," and she suggests implications for best practice would be to develop learning modules that create opportunities for students to get enrichment or remediation depending on their skill level.
According to Downes (1998), one of the keys to a successful online community is ownership. Members are responsible for its growth and development. "It is a shared and constructed environment, where the members along with organizers play roughly equal roles in content creation" (Downes, 1998). If a student doesn't want to network or collaborate in a learning community for an online course, members should continue on without that person but try to offer support and persuasion to that person to get them to participate. It is the role of the instructor to distinguish a non-participant and make a decision determining consequences. If the person is not interested in being an active participant in a community, I suggest the removal of the individual from the group. I have taken students out of a group if I felt they were negatively affecting the outcome of a group. I have found that group dynamics, lack of interest or motivation are some of the reasons for student removal from a group. The impact on the assessment would be predetermined by the rubric. If a task offers students opportunities to earn points for group participation and a member has been dismissed by an instructor, then that student forfeits those points from the rubric. The community of learners that remain will be better able to focus on their task.
References:
Downes, S., (1998). The Future of online learning. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 1(3). Retrieved from
http://www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/fall1998/downes13.html
Siemens, G. (2008). Assessment of collaborative learning. (Vodcast). Principles of
Distance Education DVD produced by Laureate Education, Inc., Baltimore.
Siemens, G. (2008). Learning communities. (Vodcast). Principles of Distance Education DVD produced by Laureate Education, Inc., Baltimore.
Swan, K. (2004). Relationships between interactions and learning environments. The Sloan Consortium.
Karen
ReplyDeleteWhat were you thinking? Using a font of 7 in New Times Roman? Do you want to blind us? (LOL).
Anyway, I copied it and increase the font for reading, and it was very good. I particularly like the statement ‘I like to think that a rich learning experience is the reward rather than the "mark" assigned at the completion of a task’. This is so true, if only grading would take second place.
Also, I wouldn’t go beyond ‘no professor can really know everything’, because, then there would be no need for the professor to be engaged in ongoing learning.
Are you agreeing with Siemens that we are rating the professor while the course is ongoing?
It is indeed fair to say that the traditional grading with numbers or letters does not satisfy assessment in collaborative communities, but should it stop with collaborative assessment? Why not include all types of learning?
Do you think that the ultimate decision of removing the nonparticipant member of a group is the best decision?
Finally, like you, I believe it is fair to say that the traditional grading with numbers or letters does not satisfy assessment in collaborative communities, but does it satisfy any type of learning at all?
Do you think the ultimate decision of removing the nonparticipant member of a group the best decision?
Karen,
ReplyDeleteI liked your comment about having a rich learning experience instead of just fulfilling a requirement. I genuinely do like that idea, but I still feel like when you deal with people (especially busy professionals like us), there must be some accountability woven into the experience. This may take away from the authenticity of the experience, but I do think it makes collaboration more effective. What do you think?
- Margaret Neal
In Response to Milton:
ReplyDeleteSo sorry about the font. I was working in notepad and I must not have increased the size before I made the post. I didn't mean to say that traditional assessment should stop in collaborative communities. Traditional assessment generally focuses on evaluating an individual's knowledge. I think that when you assess learning in a community you can no longer just focus on the individual. The dynamics of the assessment changes. The task accomplished by the group might have smaller individual assessment opportunities, but the learning process and experiences among group members will be far more productive for the participants. In a math world, it seems traditional assessment is linear and in the collaborative community it is much more three dimensional. I think that the productive learning experiences should help generate knowledge and cultivate higher learning thinking skills which is the goal of most educators. If I was the instructor of an online community, I would create opportunities to encourage collaboration, assess that with a pre-determined rubric and follow the task with an individual assessment to be sure each student is progressing throughout the task. Finally, I do think that removing the nonparticipant is the best decision. I teach high school and I am not there to baby the kids. If someone doesn't want to do the work for whatever reason, they are not going to be forced. Of course, I would encourage that student and try to placate his or her needs before removing them from the group. In our learning communities online in this class, we all have to make decisions to be involved or watch from the sidelines. Being part of a community is making a conscious decision to commit. Without the commitment, you are already excluded.
Response to Mayci:
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely we need accountability. I think that success of a group is based on trust, dependence, a sense of ownership or pride and accountability. I constantly reflect back to how cooperative groups in my classroom are so similar to the collaborative communities created online. We need each member to feel like an active participant and as an instructor we need to check for activity at regular intervals. If I give a collaborative assignment, I am constantly checking to be sure everyone is engaged in the learning and staying on task. Just like our community, we are being monitored weekly to be sure we are actively involved in the learning communities. We are held accountable because our feedback and grades posted let us know if we are on task.
Excellent response Karen
ReplyDeleteI appreciate you taking time to respond to my many questions. You are a TRUE team person. Working with you in a group is very good.
Karen: You state "I think that participation in a learning community should be assessed in a similar way", but canned assessment methods do not allow learners to address their different needs and interests. Assessment is more rewarding for the learners if they are allowed to customize their approach to assessment. They should be allowed to select a project, write a paper or demonstrate their understanding of the materials that has a direct link to their work or to their professional interests. Just a thought.
ReplyDeleteNice post, Karen!
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering, when you have students' assess each other's work, do you include that assessment in the final grades for the project?