Top

TechTrends

Published in:

20-01-2023 | Original Paper

Peer Assessment Collaboration Evaluation: An Innovative Assessment Tool for Online Learning Environments

Authors: Byron Havard, Megan Podsiad, Karen Valaitis

Published in: TechTrends | Issue 2/2023

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

The Peer Assessment Collaboration Evaluation (PACE) Tool is an original peer assessment tool designed and developed by the authors to address the prevalence of social loafing in group projects in online learning environments. Online group projects offer students collaborative opportunities to engage in critical thinking and problem-solving. Students’ participation and learning in online group projects are negatively impacted by social loafing. A total of 104 students completed all study requirements, and their data were used in the final analyses. One-way repeated-measures ANOVAs revealed significant positive main effects of PACE Tool use on participants’ attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and related subcomponents. Students’ use of the tool increased their behavioral intent to engage in peer assessment in the future may reduce social loafing in group projects, thereby positively influencing academic performance. Instructors’ use of the tool may combat negative connotations associated with group work and social loafing, creating learning environments for effective group projects.

previous article The Charm or Chasm of Digital Personalized Learning in Education: Teachers’ Reported Use, Perceptions and Expectations

next article Multiple Perspectives with Online EFL Practicum Technology Learning: Case Study on a Cloud

Available only for authorised users

Abernathy, A. M., & Lett, W. L., III. (2005). You are fired! A method to control and sanction free riding in group assignments. Marketing Education Review, 15(1), 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2005.11488891CrossRef

Aggarwal, P., & O’Brien, C. L. (2008). Social loafing on group projects: Structural antecedents and effect on student satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(3), 255–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475308322283CrossRef

Ajjan, H., & Hartshorne, R. (2008). Investigating faculty decisions to adopt web 2.0 technologies: Theory and empirical tests. Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 71–80.CrossRef

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.CrossRef

Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality and behaviour (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice-Hall.

Anson, R., & Goodman, J. A. (2014). A peer assessment system to improve student team experiences. Journal of Education for Business, 89(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2012.754735CrossRef

Bacon, D. R. (2005). The effect of group projects on content-related learning. Journal of Management Education, 29(2), 248–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562904263729CrossRef

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.37.2.122CrossRef

Blau, G., Petrucci, T., Rivera, M., & Ghate, R. (2019). Exploring the impact of receiving sender-based negative and positive feedback on team-level process outcomes using a mobile application. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 17(1), 76–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12170CrossRef

Börjesson, P. O., Hamidian, A., Kubilinskas, E., Richter, U., Weyns, K., & Ödling, P. (2006). Free-riding in group work – Mechanisms and countermeasures. Journal of Management. Retrieved November 5, 2021, from URL http://www.lth.se/fileadmin/lth/genombrottet/konferens2006/p_o_b_rjesson_mfl.pdf

Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (1989). Quantitative studies of student self-assessment in higher education: A critical analysis of findings. Higher Education, 18(5), 529–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138746CrossRef

Brooks, C. M., & Ammons, J. L. (2003). Free riding in group projects and the effects of timing, frequency, and specificity of criteria in peer assessments. Journal of Education for Business, 78(5), 268–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320309598613CrossRef

Capdeferro, N., & Romero, M. (2012). Are online learners frustrated with collaborative learning experiences? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(2), 26–44.CrossRef

Chennamaneni, A., Teng, J. T., & Raja, M. (2012). A unified model of knowledge sharing behaviours: Theoretical development and empirical test. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(11), 1097–1115. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2011.624637CrossRef

Chidambaram, L., & Tung, L. L. (2005). Is out of sight, out of mind? An empirical study of social loafing in technology-supported groups. Information Systems Research, 16(2), 149–168. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1050.0051CrossRef

Choi, Y., & Ro, H. (2012). An empirical study of hospitality management student attitudes toward group projects: Instructional factors and team problems. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (Online), 9(4), 303. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v9i4.7301

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRef

Delaney, D. A., Fletcher, M., Cameron, C., & Bodle, K. (2013). Online self and peer assessment of team work in accounting education. Accounting Research Journal, 26(3), 222–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-04-2012-0029CrossRef

Double, K. S., McGrane, J. A., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2020). The impact of peer assessment on academic performance: A meta-analysis of control group studies. Educational Psychology Review, 32(2), 481–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09510-3CrossRef

Fearon, C., McLaughlin, H., & Tan, Y. E. (2012). Using student group work in higher education to emulate professional communities of practice. Education & Training, 54(2), 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911211210233CrossRef

Ferrante, C. J., Green, S. G., & Forster, W. R. (2006). Getting more out of team projects: Incentivizing leadership to enhance performance. Journal of Management Education, 30(6), 788–797. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562906287968CrossRef

Freeman, M., & McKenzie, J. (2002). SPARK, a confidential web–based template for self and peer assessment of student teamwork: Benefits of evaluating across different subjects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00291CrossRef

Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking. Journal of Technology Education JTE, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v7i1.a.2

Hall, D., & Buzwell, S. (2013). The problem of free-riding in group projects: Looking beyond social loafing as reason for non-contribution. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14(1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787412467123CrossRef

Harding, L. M. (2018). Students of a feather “flocked” together: A group assignment method for reducing free-riding and improving group and individual learning outcomes. Journal of Marketing Education, 40(2), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475317708588CrossRef

Havard, B., Ellis, H., & Kingry, M. A. (2013). The team member evaluation tool: Assigning individual grades on group projects. In R. McBride & M. Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (pp. 510–515). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Ingham, A. G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckham, V. (1974). The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10(4), 371–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(74)90033-XCrossRef

Kelley, D. (2015). Peer evaluation within a team design project. Journal of Engineering Technology, 32(1), 44–50. Retrieved October 22, 2021, from URL https://www.engtech.org/jet/

Kennedy, G. J. (2005). Peer-assessment in group projects: is it worth it? In Proceedings of the 7th Australasian conference on Computing education-Volume 42 (pp. 59–65). Australian Computer Society, Inc. Retrieved October 22, 2021, from URL http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.59.4744&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Kerr, N. L., & Bruun, S. E. (1983). Dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free-rider effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 78–94. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.78CrossRef

Kinsella, G. K., Mahon, C., & Lillis, S. (2017). Facilitating active engagement of the university student in a large-group setting using group work activities. Journal of College Science Teaching, 46(6), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst17_046_06_34CrossRef

Ku, H. Y., Tseng, H. W., & Akarasriworn, C. (2013). Collaboration factors, teamwork satisfaction, and student attitudes toward online collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 922–929.CrossRef

Loughry, M. L., Ohland, M. W., & Moore, D. D. (2007). Development of a theory-based assessment of team member effectiveness. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(3), 505–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406292085CrossRef

Mahmood, A., Choudhary, M. A., & Qurashi, A. H. (2016, September). Redesigning the way teams work smarter using comprehensive assessment of team member effectiveness (CATME). In Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), 2016 Portland International Conference on (pp. 1713–1718). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/PICMET.2016.7806768

Mayende, G., Isabwe, G. M. N., Muyinda, P. B., & Prinz, A. (2015). Peer assessment based assignment to enhance interactions in online learning groups. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), Italy, pp. 668–672. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICL.2015.7318106

Mefoh, P. C., & Nwanosike, C. L. (2012). Effects of group size and expectancy of reward on social loafing. IFE Psychologia: An International Journal, 20(1), 229–240.

Mihelič, K. K., & Culiberg, B. (2019). Reaping the fruits of another’s labor: The role of moral meaningfulness, mindfulness, and motivation in social loafing. Journal of Business Ethics, 160(3), 713–727. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3933-zCrossRef

Misra, R. K., & Khurana, K. (2017). Employability skills among information technology professionals: A literature review. Procedia Computer Science, 122, 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.342CrossRef

Ohland, M. W., Loughry, M. L., Woehr, D. J., Bullard, L. G., Felder, R. M., Finelli, C. J., Layton, R. A., Pomeranz, H. R., & Schmucker, D. G. (2012). The comprehensive assessment of team member effectiveness: Development of a behaviorally anchored rating scale for self-and peer evaluation. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(4), 609–630. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0177CrossRef

Patil, M. S., Desai, P., Vijayalakshmi, M., Raikar, M. M., Battur, S., Parikshit, H., & Joshi, G. H. (2016). Trusted relative peer review: a novel approach to assess an individual in Team based learning. In MOOCs, Innovation and Technology in Education (MITE), 2016 IEEE 4th International Conference on (pp. 54–59). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITE.2016.021

Podsiad, M., & Havard, B. (2020). Faculty acceptance of the peer assessment collaboration evaluation tool: A quantitative study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 1381–1407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09742-zCrossRef

Pung, C. P., & Farris, J. (2011). A preliminary assessment of the CATME peer evaluation tool effectiveness. Proceedings of the 2011 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Canada, pp. 22.261.1–22.261.15. Retrieved from https://peer.asee.org/17542

Repice, M. D., Sawyer, R. K., Hogrebe, M. C., Brown, P. L., Luesse, S. B., Gealy, D. J., & Frey, R. F. (2016). Talking through the problems: A study of discourse in peer-led small groups. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(3), 555–568. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00154DCrossRef

Roberts, T. S., & McInnerney, J. M. (2007). Seven problems of online group learning (and their solutions). Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 257–268.

Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2012). Exploring factors that predict preservice teachers’ intentions to use web 2.0 technologies using decomposed theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(2), 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2012.10782602CrossRef

Serdyukov, P. (2017). Innovation in education: What works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 10(1), 4–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2016-0007CrossRef

Sharan, S., & Sharan, Y. (1976). Small group teaching. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology.

Simms, A., & Nichols, T. (2014). Social loafing: A review of the literature. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15(1), 58–67. Retrieved November 5, 2021, from URL http://www.na-businesspress.com/JMPP/NicholsT_Web15_1_.pdf

Sisodia, S., & Agarwal, N. (2017). Employability skills essential for healthcare industry. Procedia Computer Science, 122, 431–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.390CrossRef

Sridharan, B., Muttakin, M. B., & Mihret, D. G. (2018). Students’ perceptions of peer assessment effectiveness: An explorative study. Accounting Education, 27(3), 259–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2018.1476894CrossRef

Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(4), 144–176. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144CrossRef

Tenório, T., Bittencourt, I. I., Isotani, S., & Silva, A. P. (2016). Does peer assessment in on-line learning environments work? A systematic review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 94–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.020CrossRef

Tsitskari, E., Goudas, M., Tsalouchou, E., & Michalopoulou, M. (2017). Employers’ expectations of the employability skills needed in the sport and recreation environment. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 20, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2016.11.002CrossRef

Tymon, A. (2013). The student perspective on employability. Studies in Higher Education, 38(6), 841–856. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.604408CrossRef

Willey, K., & Gardner, A. (2009a). Developing team skills with self-and peer assessment: Are benefits inversely related to team function? Campus-Wide Information Systems, 26(5), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650840911004796CrossRef

Willey, K., & Gardner, A. (2009b). Improving self-and peer assessment processes with technology. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 26(5), 379–399. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650740911004804CrossRef

Wu, C., Chanda, E., & Willison, J. (2014). Implementation and outcomes of online self and peer assessment on group based honours research projects. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.779634CrossRef

Yan, Z., Lao, H., Panadero, E., Fernández-Castilla, B., Yang, L., & Yang, M. (2022). Effects of self-assessment and peer-assessment interventions on academic performance: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100484

Ying, X., Li, H., Jiang, S., Peng, F., & Lin, Z. (2014). Group laziness: The effect of social loafing on group performance. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(3), 465–471. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.3.465CrossRef

Title: Peer Assessment Collaboration Evaluation: An Innovative Assessment Tool for Online Learning Environments
Authors: Byron Havard
Megan Podsiad
Karen Valaitis
Publication date: 20-01-2023
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: TechTrends / Issue 2/2023
Print ISSN: 8756-3894
Electronic ISSN: 1559-7075
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00832-8

Springer Professional

Peer Assessment Collaboration Evaluation: An Innovative Assessment Tool for Online Learning Environments

Abstract

Premium Partner

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Other articles of this Issue 2/2023

Instructional Videos

The use of the Video Platform FlipGrid for Practicing Science Oral Communication

Introducing the March 2023 Issue

Protecting Students: Data Privacy in the African Union

The Impact of Text-to-Speech on Reading Comprehension of Students with Learning Disabilities in an Urban School

Correction: Review of Kirschner, P.A., Hendrick, C., and Heal, J. (2022). How Teaching Happens: Seminal Works in Teaching and Teacher Effectiveness and What they Mean in Practice. Routledge. ISBN: 978-1-032-13208-2