- How should participation in a collaborative learning community be assessed? How do the varying levels of skill and knowledge students bring to a course affect the instructor's "fair and equitable assessment" of learning?
When assessing a collaborative learning community, there should be an established goal from the beginning. Once the goal is set, there needs to be an understanding of what the expectations of the members of the community is. Once this is established this will allow the students to understand what they need to in order to be able to positively contribute to the group. According to Palloff and Pratt (2005) “A simple rule to remember when assessing collaborative work is that collaborative activities are best assessed collaboratively” (p.44). The members of a group understands what the others in the group have done and what was expected of each of the group members.
When considering the different skills and knowledge of the students in a course it is important to keep a rubric. A rubric allows the students to see what is expected and what the standard is. Once the students understand this, they can perform to the standard to the best of their ability. The rubric will also allow students to grow as learners and allow the collaborative group to grow as well.
- If a student does not want to network or collaborate in a learning community for an online course, what should the other members of the learning community do? What role should the instructor play? What impact would this have on his or her assessment plan?
If a student choose not to network of collaborate it is important that the student has an understanding why they feel that way and what the whole reason behind the networking is. Clearly the student is not feeling like they are having the connection that they would if they were involved with an online learning group. The other members of the group need to make an effort to contact the missing group member and encourage them to keep working with the program and the learning group. The instructor in this case should be acting as a cheerleader or a moderator for the group. According to Palloff and Pratt (2007) an important way to get the involvement of the missing member “all means of communication including the telephone and face to face meetings” (p.65) If all means of communication has failed assessment should be done according to the rubric that was established for the learning community.
Reference:
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007) Building online learning communities. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Palloff, R. M. & Pratt, K. (2005) Collaborating online. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Ca.
Robert,
ReplyDeleteI also think that it is important to establish your goals and objectives in any type of learning environment. It is so important for each member of a learning community to understand that the finished product is every member's responsibility.
Marion Bush
Robert,
ReplyDeleteUsing a rubric can be very helpful. The student has a clear picture of the expectations for all assignments and projects. If participation goals are not met in a collaborative setting, communication lines should be open for all parties to address the issue.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRobert: You noted that establishing goals for the students is the first step in the assessment process. I would suggest that the next step is for the learners and the instructor to agree upon how they will be assessed based the agreed upon goals. Learners who can work on activities that they have an interest in or that apply directly to their work will be more successful in acheiving their learning outcomes since they own the assessment process. This also helps reduce cheating.
ReplyDeleteI would agree that collaborative assessment is best assessed collaboratively. I just completed an assignment with my students where they each assessed two others in the room before I came through to assess. The first glance before the peer assessment showed assignments that were sub-standard. I found that through assessing others and getting feedback from peers, the students went back and fixed up their projects and the students began supporting one another (not all, but most).
ReplyDelete