Assessing Collaborative Efforts

 “How do we know they know?” is the fundamental question that determines the nature, scope, and value of learner assessment (Paloff & Pratt, 2009, p. 3). Assessment is central to defining and measuring the degree to which a learner achieves stated learning objectives. Instruction that includes appropriate assessment-based methodology utilizes constructive alignment, which as a fundamental principle of education, requires a good teaching system to bring teaching method and assessment into alignment so that all aspects of the system are in accord in supporting appropriate student learning (Biggs, 2003). (Here’s a rubric on developing an online course as defined by the California State University)

Assessment demands the alignment of teaching method and assessment to learning activities and collaboration is no different. Assessing participation in a collaborative community must include the following:

1. a well-defined  collaborative objective that includes a clearly articulated rationale
2. a distinct system to assess collaboration that includes a clearly articulated rationale

In #1, the instructor describes what is to be achieved and why. In #2, the instructor explains how he/she will perform the assessment and why he/she chose that method of performance. Paloff and Pratt (2009) indicated that, as a rule, collaborative activities are best assessed collaboratively. By requesting students submit self-evaluations of their individual activities and peer assessment, instructors could achieve this requirement. This is in agreement with Swan (2004) who identified four distinct interactions for learning effectiveness in online environments, interactions with content, instructors, classmates, and course interfaces. These interactions help develop divergent thinking where team members are not unanimous in their thought processes as much as they are harmonious. They also strengthen ongoing support for instructors, provide timely feedback, automate testing, and ongoing course development. The virtual university design and technology division of Michigan State University (MSU) has a well-defined system to develop online and peer assessment. MSU’s Faculty and Organization Development site includes links to several online instructional resources.

 Paloff and Pratt (2009) identified several principles that should guide student assessment in an online course in reference to collaboration. The pertinent ones include:

1. Design and include grading rubrics for the assessment of collaboration
2. Include collaborative assessments through public posting of papers that accompany comments from student to student
3. Using assessment techniques that fit the context and align with learning objectives
4. Asking students to incorporate their input into the method for conducting assessment

Using these four principles, an instructor could assess a student’s participation in a collaborative learning community. Since collaboration is the effective interactivity based on well-defined goal of a learning community, the participants are the best judges of each other’s activity in the progress toward a collaborative objective. The instructor may need to create a rubric that includes the evaluation of participants’ areas of strengths. Palloff and Pratt (2007) suggested that the human side of online learning appeals to the need for “connectedness, and coalescence” (p. 50). By involving the learners in the assessment process, expresses the conviction that students can be experts in areas of their own learning and that promotion of self-direction is important (Paloff & Pratt, 2009). Hurst and Thomas (2008) presented their experience with online team training and building skills in action and identified the accomplishing of a team project as the common goal toward which online education administrators need to strive.

Principles #1 and #2 above address the acceptance of students’ comments on each other’s work in thereby demonstrating, to a degree, the instructor’s attempt at “fair and equitable assessment” based on well-defined grading rubrics (See article by Swan, Shen, and Hiltz for sample rubrics for assessing collaborative work). Macdonald’s work on the assessment of online collaborative learning as a process and product highlights the importance of assessment in ensuring online participation (You will find the abstract to Macdonald’s article here ). Furthermore, by linking theoretical discussions to one’s own experience can give opportunities for students with particular skills and knowledge to contribute to achieving collaborative goals. (See Bobby Elliot’s article “Online Collaborative Assessment”  

I think that incorporating principles #4 and #5 above will further enhance the students’ perspective of the instructor’s intent to be “fair and equitable” in assessing their work. Arnold, Ducate, Lomicka, and Lord (2009) in a study of computer-supported collaborative learning among foreign language graduate students determined that success in interaction depends largely on the group members themselves. Consequently, it is incumbent upon the members of the collaborative community to encourage one another to participate and hold each one accountable.

Anne Marie highlighted a few questions that address collaborative learning. It is interesting to note that regardless of the field, students and educators find online collaboration hard. She opined as to why evaluators are concerned about assessing online collaboration when instructors are happy for students to work in small groups in a tutorial without assessing relative contributions. Anthony Cocciolo included an excellent diagram to visualize the components of a community network which he noted defines how one analyzes and assesses in terms of member interaction which he referred to as “sociality.” As Siemens (2009) suggested it is the intentional creation of connections between the participants that leads to effective collaboration and mutual accomplishment of clearly defined goals. Consequently, it may be important to focus on the rationale for creating the connections between members of a learning community in the real world and in its virtual counterpart rather than on achieving collaborative steady state.

References

Arnold, N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2009). Assessing online collaboration among language teachers: A cross-institutional case study. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 121-139.

Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Buckingham: SRHE and the Open University Press.

Hurst, D. & Thomas, J. (2008). Developing team skills and accomplishing team projects online in Anderson, T. (Ed.). The theory and practice of online learning, (2nd ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Palloff, R. M. & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom, (2^nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Paloff, R. M. & Pratt, K. (2009). Assessing the online learner: Resources and strategies for faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (2009). Learning Communities. Resource vodcast in Principles of Distance Education (EDUC 8842, Winter 2009), Walden University, Laureate Education.

 Swan, K. (2004). Relationships between interactions and learning in online environments. The Sloan Consortium.