Group Work Assessment in Media Production

1

• Group Work Assessment in Media Production
• Discussion of the project and the issues
• March 28th 2003
• Andrew Ireland
• Project Manager, GWAMP
• Lecturer in Television Production,
• Bournemouth University

2
What Im going to cover

• GWAMP
• Why group work is important
• Problems with assessing group work
• A case study of peer assessment
• Computer-aided assessment
• Best Practice

3
Overview of project

• GWAMP
• Group Work Assessment in Media Production
• A three year FDTL project
• Dissemination strategy
• Supported by LTSN

4
Higher Education

• Independent, self directed learners who
• Set their own goals
• Know how to achieve them
• Know when they have achieved them

5
Teamwork in H.E.

• Collaborative learning
• Assessing others
• Giving feedback to others
• Being self-critical of own work
• A transferable key skill

6
Group Work in Media Production

• Vocational activity
• Replicating real-world practice
• Role-orientated practice
• Helps reflection and therefore learning
• A crucial key skill for successful employment in
  the media industry

7
Problems

• Student resistance
• Feedback
• What to mark?
• Degree classification
• Validity
• Reliability
• Transparency
• Moderation

8
Problems with assessing group work in Media
Production

• Students work in hierarchic groups as well as
  collaboratively
• Tutor is not usually present when the work is
  carried out
• Students are not usually present when the work is
  assessed
• The process is assessed as well as the finished
  artefact

9
Group Work and Assessment

• Induction and group formation
• Group work process
• Group work assessment

10
Induction and group formation

• How are groups formed?
• How are roles allocated?
• Do you teach group working skills?
• Do you teach self and / or peer assessment
  skills, explain criteria, and mark range?
• Do the learning outcomes of the unit match the
  assessment tasks and criteria?

11
Group work process

• Is the process monitored? How?
• What support does the tutor offer for group
  maintenance?
• Are there intermediate deadlines to keep the
  project on target? Is there formative assessment
  at these points?

12
Group work assessment

• Is the marking mainly on product, or process, or
  a combination of the two?
• Is there self assessment? Is this the same as a
  reflective essay?
• Is there peer assessment?
• How is feedback given? Is there a group
  discussion and justification of the individual
  marks awarded?

13
Group work assessment

• Which of these assessment systems do you use?
• Student diary
• Student reflective essay - on the process
• Student reflective essay - on own performance
• Student written review of final project - own?
  Other groups?
• Peer assessment - with a proforma?
• Tutor assessment of the process and individual
  contributions
• Viva
• Mark for specialist role (I.e. lighting)
• Tutor mark for the final artefact
• Students mark for the final artefact

14
Some assessment systems

• Give everyone the same mark
• Everyone has a different task and they get marked
  on that
• The group gets a mark for the project - e.g. 60.
  If there are six students, the group has 6 x
  60360 marks to allocate among themselves to
  reflect involvement / contribution
• A basic mark is awarded for the project, and then
  each member negotiates / - 10 in tutorial with
  the tutor who has access to diaries, notes from
  tutorials etc.
• A basic mark is awarded for the project (e.g.
  60) and students individually allocate a mark to
  each of their peers (and themselves) which are
  averaged to produce an individual mark for each
  student (40).

15
GWAMP Case Studies

• 6 video case studies
• Television Documentary at the University of
  Huddersfield
• Radio Journalism at Warrington Collegiate
  Institute
• Advertising at the University of Gloucestershire
• Television Production at Bournemouth University
• Interactive Media at the University of Western
  England
• Producing Multimedia at the University of Luton

16
Television Production at Bournemouth University

• Level I unit
• Students work in groups on a number of video
  productions
• Peer and Self assessment makes up 35 of the unit
  mark
• Each project is assessed by a tutor and is
  weighted 50 of the overall unit mark
• Each student writes a 4,000 word Production
  Analysis worth 15 which is a further form of
  self assessment

17
Television Production at Bournemouth University

• An example of how GWAMP has informed our own
  learning and teaching strategies
• Since filming the video case study we have
  introduced a pro-forma to alleviate the students
  concerns about this form of assessment
• The peer assessment is moderated by everyone
  marking everyone else
• Students also discuss their feedback in group
  tutorials
• View Video Case Study

18

• Best practice is good practice used appropriately
• Extensive supporting materials
• Flexible approach to changes in groups
• Assessment criteria that reflect the intended
  learning outcomes
• Flexibility to allow students to have
  part-ownership of the group work and assessment
  process
• Tutor and technical support of the group work
  process
• Formative assessment that allows students to
  reflect on their participation in group work
• Tutor ability to moderate peer assessment and
  deal proficiently with student appeals
• Transparency of assessment to allow students to
  understand the assessment process

19
Conference

• 12th September 2003
• Group Working and Assessment
• A Resource Pack that will feature Academic
  Papers, lesson plans and a DVD learning and
  teaching package.

20
Beyond GWAMP

• Peer assessment is time consuming and difficult
  to administer
• C.A.S.P.A.R.
• Computer Assisted Self and Peer Assessment
  Ratings
• A customisable database with a web front-end
• 2003-2004

21
End of Presentation

• aireland_at_bournemouth.ac.uk
• Tel. [phone]
• www.gwamp.bournemouth.ac.uk