United fronts in group projects
I assign a major presentation at the end of my classes and create the groups strategically. I break up the cliques and best friends in order to ensure each group is diverse in comfort, abilities, etc. One thing I ask them to do at the end is do a peer critique. I obviously monitor them throughout the process and can pick out who is doing the most work, who is contributing the least, but when they do the peer critiques, they will all say that they had a positive experience and everyone pulled their weight, when in fact, they haven't. I'm not trying to get them to tattle on one another, as I ask them very reflective questions (strengths, areas of improvement, etc.) but I would like them to feel comfortable giving constructive criticism to their team members and really assess their contributions. Their grades are not based off of their peer critique. In other words, just because they say a team member didn't contribute, that person doesn't automatically get a failing grade. Any suggestions on how to get more thoughtful peer critiques?
I haven't done this in small groups, and perhaps that is why mine were more honest. They were given a number system (0-5)on each area of professionalism. If any student was given higher or lower than a 3, they needed to give some type of comment to say why they gave that number. I gave them on half-sheets of paper so that they knew they could keep their comments brief and to-the-point.
Hi Hilary,
I have found the same to be true. Accurate critiques are not being given. I always emphasize the honesty part whenever I have them critique each other, but honesty does not always occur. I am still trying to come up with a more effective measure as well.
Patricia
