antony mellor & jane entwistle school of applied sciences northumbria university

Antony Mellor & Jane EntwistleSchool of Applied Sciences

Northumbria University

Marginalised students in group work assessment:ethical issues of the effective support of such individuals

Photo: First year fieldtrip to the Cairngorms, Scotland

Overview

Introduction. Context. Methods. Key findings. Evaluation. Future considerations.

School of Applied Sciences

Introduction

Employers greatly value a graduate’s ability to work in teams, whether multi-disciplinary or single disciplinary (Hiley and Carter 2003).

Role of group work in encouraging deep learning and developing specific ‘life skills’ such as decision-making, teamwork and communication skills (Mills 2003).

A vehicle by which students can be involved in deep learning, developing their skills experientially and contributing to the skills they will need for life-long learning (Parsons 2002).


Introduction

Facilitates evaluation of their (students’) own work and that of their peers (Bourner et al. 2001).

Important that students learn about their effectiveness in a group setting (Boud et al. 1999).

Team work is part of the ‘employers’ curriculum established by the EHE initiative in 1989.

Contribution to social and academic integration recognised (Wilcox et al. 2005).

Supports student retention and engagement (Inkelas et al. 2007).


Introduction

Group work is well embedded in the learning, teaching and assessment culture of our subject discipline of Geography (Chalkley and Harwood 2006, Knight 2004, Livingstone and Lynch 2002, Maguire and Edmondson 2001).

But not always popular!


Context Final year BSc (Hons) Geography option

module: Soil Degradation and Rehabilitation (GE0156).

20 credits, year-long delivery, 30 full-time students, 2 hours per week.

Assessment: Group work project (40%). Examination (60%).

Group work project: Presentation (25%) Written report (60%) Individual critical reflection (15%)


Soil Conservation Strategies


Issues adversely affecting the student learning experience

Adverse group dynamics. Unequal contributions by individuals within groups. Ethical issues of group (self) formation. Ethical issues of marginalised students.

Aim: how best can we support marginalised students in group work assessment and what might be the most effective support measures?


4 Key Interventions

Timetabled group-work sessions. Allow individuals within groups to play to their

strengths. Formative feedback on drafts of the summative

written report. Individual critical reflection component. Decided on a model of equality of support for

all groups and individuals within groups.


Data collection

Student critical reflections. Student evaluation questionnaires:

Open questions. Closed questions (Likert scale).

Written tutor diary/log.


Key findings


Student critical reflections

Friendship groups. Disagreement and conflict. Unequal workload. Communication. Organisation and roles. Learning.


Open questionnaires

Dominant emotions - highly polarised. Most very pleased that groups were self selected. General agreement on what makes for a well functioning group:

effective communication, strong work ethic, democratic decision-making, awareness of everyone’s strengths and weaknesses, identification of clear roles and good organisation.

Dominant communication methods were group meetings (post lecture), e-mail & text.


Open questionnaires

Positive aspects of group work: Able to learn from each other (bounce ideas

around). Able to see how others work. Workload (& ‘worry’?) shared. Learnt valuable team-work skills. It was fun.


Open questionnaires

Negative aspects of group work: Communication. Clashes of opinion and over-dominance of

some individuals. Unequal contribution. Dealing with variable standards. Clashes with (paid) work commitments. Meeting agreed deadlines.


Open questionnaires

highly positive about: staff support & formative feedback, availability of timetabled sessions for group meetings, being able to play to their strengths, Individual critical reflections.

“It was good to reflect on the group’s performance – this could help when in a work environment and I will need to understand how group dynamics work.”


Open questionnaires

Issues around: role designation, individuals unable to work on their weaknesses, individual critical reflection & word limit.

“I thought it wasn’t really beneficial to us and the style of writing so different to an essay.”


Closed questionnaires

> 70 % agree I enjoyed the group assessment project overall. I prefer to be part of a group that is self-selected. It was easy for me to find a group to engage with. I chose to be part of my group mainly for personal and social

reasons. My group was easily able to agree and allocate tasks. I felt positive about my personal contribution to the group

effort. Everyone in the group appeared to be clear about what they

were meant to be doing.



> 20 % disagree I felt that I learned more as a result of being part of a group

than I would have done on my own. I chose to be a part of my group mainly for academic

reasons. I feel uncomfortable working with individuals in a group that I

do not know well. The tendency for one or more individuals in the group to be

over-dominant made me feel uncomfortable. At times I felt that my views were not listened to by other

members of the group.



> 20 % disagree I took on a dominant role in an attempt to lead my group as I

felt that insufficient progress was being made. I had some concerns about unequal workload and

contribution across individuals in the group.

Note of caution: data presented represent the majority view. What of the potentially marginalised minority – need also to look at the detail in the data.


Tutor diary/log

All four interventions had a positive role to play in supporting isolated and marginalised students with their (and their groups) experience of group-work.

Individual critical reflection: Least successful intervention. Provided a platform for student grievances and issues to be

raised, and facilitated their ability to develop different approaches to solving more abstract problems.

Outcomes from this intervention useful in future planning.


Reframing the questions

Are the four interventions sufficient? The definition of a ‘marginalised’ student is more

complex. Is the guidance that we are offering too intrusive? Equality v equity – a more targeted approach?

Supporting groups with marginalised students. Supporting groups who are behind in the assignment,

but not necessarily marginalised.


Future considerations

Additional facilitation of group-working. Allow 10 minutes at start of each teaching session.

Monitor groups more closely. Fortnightly progress reports, including meeting minutes, work

distribution, aims for next meeting and outstanding issues. Greater staff follow-up (intervention v guidance). Consider ways of assessing contributions of

individuals within the groups. Review preparation of students for group work. Consider student interviews. Consider more detailed analysis of data.


Photo: First year fieldtrip to the Cairngorms, Scotland

Thank you for listening

Any questions?

antony mellor & jane entwistle school of applied sciences northumbria university

Documents

group work assessment

group work project

role of group work

functioning group

team work

deep learning

fulltime students

lifelong learning parsons