Cooperative learning and peer evaluation: the effect of free riders on team performance and the relationship between course performance and peer evaluation
Main Article Content
Abstract
Cooperative learning has gained popularity in higher educational settings. However, assigning grades fairly to all team members in a way that rewards them for their contributions remains challenging. In this paper, we ask whether having free riders on a team lowers the quality of submitted work, and whether students’ course performance correlates with peer evaluations. In an introductory sociology course, 101 students were grouped into 20 teams; each team completed a set of three papers. Students were evaluated by the quality of work submitted and peer evaluations. For statistical analysis, we organized the teams into one of three groups, among which we compared average paper grades: group one contained teams with free riders, group two contained teams that may have free riders, and group three contained teams with no free riders. We found that teams with free riders did not submit significantly lower quality work than teams without free riders. We also statistically analyzed the relationship between student course performance and their peer evaluation, and found that students’ performance in the course showed little correlation with their peer evaluations. Our results indicate that free riders do not depress the grades of non-free rider students. We also found that students’ peer evaluations do not correlate with their course performance, a finding which warrants further research.
Downloads
Article Details
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
Bartle, E.K., Dook, J., & Mocerino, M. (2011). Attitudes of tertiary students towards a group project in a science unit. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12, 313-311.
Caulfield, S.L., & Persell, C.H. (2006). Teaching social science reasoning and quantitative literacy: The role of collaborative groups. Teaching Sociology, 34, 39-53.
Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (2000). Making a difference: Using peers to assess individual students' contributions to a group project. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(2), 243-256.
Conway, J.M., & Huffcutt, A.I. (1997). Psychometric properties of multisource performance ratings: A meta-analysis of subordinate, supervisor, peer, and self-ratings. Human Performance, 10(4), 331-360.
Conway, R., & Kember, D. (1993). Peer assessment of an individual's contribution to a group project. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 45-57.
Fink, L.D. (2002). Beyond small groups: Harnessing the extraordinary power of learning teams. In L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight & L. D. Fink (Eds.), Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups (pp. 3-25). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Gatfield, T. (1999). Examining student satisfaction with group projects and peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 365-377.
Huang, H., Yang, S., Kuo, Y., & Yang, S. (2007, September 3-7). The study of "Free-rider" In problem-based learning situation. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering Education, Coimbra, Portugal.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Holubec, E.J. (1986). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Kagan, S. (1995). Group grades miss the mark. Educational Leadership, 52(8), 68-71.
Kane, J.S., & Lawler, E.E.I. (1978). Methods of peer assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 85(3), 555-586.
Kaufman, D.B., Felder, R.M., & Fuller, H. (2000). Accounting for individual effort in cooperative learning teams. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 133-140.
King, P.E., & Behnke, R.R. (2005). Problems associated with evaluating student performance in groups. College Teaching, 53(2), 57-61.
Longmore, M.A., Dunn, D., & Jarboe, G.R. (1996). Learning by doing: Group projects in research methods classes. Teaching Sociology, 24(1), 84-91.
McKinney, K., & Graham-Buxton, M. (1993). The use of collaborative learning groups in the large class: Is it possible? Teaching Sociology, 21(4), 403-408.
Millis, B.J., & Cottell, P.G.J. (1998). Cooperative learning for higher education faculty. Phoenix, AZ: American Council on Education and The Oryx Press.
Oakley, B., Felder, R.M., Brent, R., & Elhajj, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), 9-34.
Ohland, M.W., Layton, R.A., Loughry, M.L., & Yuhasz, A.G. (2005). Effects of behavioral anchors on peer evaluation reliability. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(3), 319-326.
Persons, O.S. (1998). Factors influencing students' peer evaluation in cooperative learning. Journal of Education for Business, 73(4), 225-229.
Rao, S.P., & DiCarlo, S.E. (2000). Peer instruction improves performance on quizzes. Advances in Physiology Education, 24(1), 51-55.
Rau, W., & Heyl, B.S. (1990). Humanizing the college classroom: Collaborative learning and social organization among students. Teaching Sociology, 18(2), 141-155.
Roberts, T.S., & McInnerney, J.M. (2007). Seven problems of online group learning (and their solutions). Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 257-268.
Ruel, G., Bastiaans, N., & Nauta, A. (2003). Free riding and team performance in project education. International Journal of Management Education, 3(1), 26-38.
Schroeder, C., Scott, T.P., Tolson, H., Huang, T.-Y., & Lee, Y.-H. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(10), 1436-1460.
Shui, A., Chan, C., Lam, P., Lee, J., & Kwong, A. (2012). Baccalaureate nursing students' perceptions of peer assessment of individual contributions to a group project: A case study. Nurse Education Today, 32(3), 214-218.
Watson, W.E., BarNir, A., & Pavur, R. (2010). Elements influencing peer evaluation: An examination of individual characteristics, academic performance, and collaborative processes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(12), 2995-3019.
Webb, N.M. (1993). Collaborative group versus individual assessment in mathematics: Processes and outcomes. Educational Assessment, 1(2), 131-152.