Groupwork has become a key element of programme design and has the potential to improve student engagement, performance, marks, and retention, however, this potential is lost if the assessment design is not seen as fair (Davies, 2009; Gibbs, 2009; Meijer et al., 2020).

BuddyCheck is an easy to use peer evaluation tool within Canvas, which allows students to evaluate each team member’s performance in a group activity, as well as self-assessment. During the last year, many LJMU tutors have used this system. Some of them will be attending this session to discuss the issues surrounding groupwork assessment and their experiences of using BuddyCheck. This will also give you a chance to hear and discuss the practice around group assessment and meet others with an interest in this area.

• Jenkinson, Ian I.D.Jenkinson@ljmu.ac.uk
• Qabshoqa, Mohammed m.t.qabshoqa@ljmu.ac.uk
• Harris, Clare C.B.Harris@ljmu.ac.uk
• Darlington, Rob R.I.Darlington@ljmu.ac.uk
• Yule, Eleanor E.R.Yule@ljmu.ac.uk
• Zajitschek, Susanne s.r.zajitschek@ljmu.ac.uk

The session will also briefly describe the tool and present some of the findings from an internal evaluation.

Notes on this meeting

Feedback from tutors using this tool

• Most found a high level of student engagement and positive feedback.  
• Many were used as a 'group health check', to monitor students during the activity. This is sometimes connected with weekly group reviews by the tutor.
• Many were allowing students to comment on each other and in most cases comments were very supportive and helpful, making the students identify areas to improve 
• The tool also helps come to compare self and peer evaluations. Allowing student to reflect on group activity engagement.  

Use of group contract 

Not many staff used a group contract. Here is an interesting example of a group work contract by Dr Tya (Shaghayegh) Asgari. 

Group formation 

• Randomisation: Most staff use randomisation in some form to create the groups. In some cases they may step in to make student there is no groups with too many of any student type based on, gender, international, level of knowledge (one high performing student with all low performing students. 
• Positive allocation connected with performance level: one staff member allocates L7 students by previous performance, placing top students together and lower students together. This seems to have a positive benefit for all students, lower students trying harder.  
• Student support: Students need to know the reason for randomisation is to improve their group learning skills and be/act professionally. 
• International students can struggle with group tasks. 

Reflective reports 

Linda Walsh shared reflective report designs with a group from Konstantina Skritsovali and Gemma Dale that could be used alongside peer evaluation. 

About this network

This network focuses on sharing practice in the use of feedback to support student learning. The network will allow you to discuss research and practice in this area.

There is more information on past sessions and topics covered by this network on the Assessment and feedback network page .