Collaborative Assessment Challenges

Assessment of student learning has not always been in the educational hot-seat. As Bass and Eynon (2009) eloquently point out in the first part of their three part online essay, "education at all levels has largely taken on faith that if teachers teach, students will learn--what could be seen as a remarkable, real-life version of 'If you build it, they will come'" (¶ 6). In response to taxpayer demands for accountability, government agencies and accrediting bodies are fanning the assessment flames – as they should. As a parent, and a professional who has seen the results of weak assessment practices, I fully support the increased attention. As an educator, and eLearning designer, I also welcome the attention. However, it raises some challenges for one of our most beloved activities – collaborative learning communities. In all its various forms, its assessment can be tricky. How should individual or team participation be assessed? How does the varying student skill levels change an instructor's ability to employ fair and equitable learning assessments? What if a student does not want to collaborate with their particular community? What should her peers do? What should her instructor do? In part three of their essay, Bass and Eynon (2009) confirm that "new digital environments tend to unleash and make visible dimensions of student learning that exceed the bounds of our traditional schema in higher education, problematizing our traditional trajectories of development and challenging, if not confounding, our abilities to assess. (¶ 28)"

Thankfully, many educators and researchers are dedicating countless hours to solving these problems. Of course, a well-written rubric linking student participation to course and program objectives is the foundation of any good assessment. However, beyond that, George Siemens (2008), in a recent production made in conjunction with Walden University, presents three ways of assessing a learning community. They are (a) peer assessment; (b) community assessment, sub-divided into the open educational community as well as professional list-serves; and (c) the instructor or educator (Siemens, 2008). Bass and Eynon (2009) support Siemen's second point, emphasizing a "class as a whole looks outside its boundaries to external audiences and parallel communities for progressive markers of learning and assessment" ( ¶). Palloff and Pratt (2005) further suggest that student self-assessment and reflection can help untangle this challenge (p. 42). Finally, not to be missed is their citation of Morgan and O'Reilly's (1999) six critical of assessment:

1. a clear rationale and consistent pedagogical approach;
   
2. explicit values, aims, criteria, and standards;
   
3. authentic and holistic tasks;
   
4. a facilitative degree of structure;
   
5. sufficient and timely formative assessment;
   
6. and awareness of the learning context and perceptions (Palloff & Pratt, 2005, p. 42)
   

Of course, the above methods can equally apply to assessing a student's participation, knowledge demonstrated, or tasks completed. But, what about those varying skill and knowledge levels, do they impact an instructor's ability to employ the above methods in a fair and equitable manner? I think they could. Nevertheless, I think an instructor can mitigate the impact by using Palloff and Pratt's (2005) five categories of instructor involvement: set the stage, create the environment, model the process, guide the process, and evaluate the process (pp. 20 – 24). When combined with a class or team charter, clear rubrics, cultural awareness, and effective assessment practices, an instructor should be able to reasonably maintain fair and equitable assessments in most all situations.

"Most" you ask? What happens when a student does not want to collaborate with their learning community? What should the other members of the learning community do? What should the instructor do?

In these cases, a team or course charter becomes critical. This charter may detail (a) how students will interact, (b) which roles each student will play, (c) deadlines, (d) conflict resolution, and (e) how students will be held accountable (Palloff & Pratt, 2005, p. 27-28). With this sort of document in place, and the ramifications of non-participation clear, students are free to encourage and support each other in the learning process.

When a team is unable to successfully resolve a conflict or motivate team members to participate completely, the instructor can get involved. The instructor's role is then to guide and facilitate resolution and the rebuilding of the learning community. Here again, Palloff and Pratt (2005) offer five items to help facilitate participation by a student: set the stage for collaboration, don't encourage over- or under-participation, address technical difficulties swiftly, provide instruction on conflict management and resolution, and maximize participation through group composition (p. 34). If necessary, the circumstance may necessitate re-evaluating the assessment plan. However, if the course has been well designed, and the rubrics, assignments, and assessments are appropriately tied to course and program objectives, assessment plans should not need to be changed. Instead, they will appropriately discover a student's academic weakness so they can be corrected with the help of instructors or tutors.

References

Bass, R., & Eynon, B. (2009, January 7). Capturing the visible evidence of invisible learning. Message January 7, 2009, posted to Academic Commons Web site: http:/​/​www.academiccommons.org/​commons/​essay/​capturing-visible-evidence-invisible-learning

Bass, R., & Eynon, B. (2009, January 7). Capturing the visible evidence of invisible learning (Part III). Message January 7, 2009, posted to Academic Commons Web site: http:/​/​www.academiccommons.org/​commons/​essay/​capturing-visible-evidence-invisible-learning-3

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating Online: Learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (Speaker). (2008). Assessment of collaborative learning (Transcript of Video Program). Laureate Education, Inc.