This document discusses approaches to assessing student effort and achievement in groups. It describes traditional teacher-centered assessments like observations and tests versus more innovative student-centered collaborative assessments. It outlines different methods of group performance evaluation, and steps to encourage a positive view of group evaluation. It also discusses combining individual and group performance evaluations through dual grading alternatives. Finally, it presents Kagan's reasons against group grading and his recommended alternatives like non-grade rewards and separate grades for collaborative skills.

1. Pramesti Ariyani (0204511044)
Devi Hermasari (0204511048)

2. Why? • Formative Evaluation or continuous assessment
• Summative Evaluation
When? • To embrace the principle of ongoing and immediate
feedback to both the teacher and the students
What? • Expanded into: not only academic dimensions of learning
but also the social dimensions.
Who? • Shift towards more active roles for students rahter than
resting solely with the teacher.
How?
• Methods that reflect the interactive dimensions of
learning tasks and the shared ownership of group product
should be used.

3. APPROACHES TO
ASSESSING THE EFFORT
AND ACHIEVEMENT OF
STUDENTS IN GROUPS
Traditional teacher- Innovative student-
centered centered,
observations and collaborative modes
tests of assessment

4. THE WHOLE GROUP
PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION BASED
Group scores in a single product
• e.g. report, essay, work sheet, etc.
Random selection of one member’s work
• All members, then, receive the score given to that
one person’s work.

5. Can a single shared
group grade be fair?

6. STEPS TO ENCOURAGE POSITIVE VIEW
OF GROUP EVALUATION
Make sure students eperience some success and enjoyment
through cooperative learning, before introducing group
evaluation.
Incorporate the basic elements of individual accountability
and positive interdependence into group experiences.
Monitor interaction when students work in groups
Make sure thatassessment criteria are consistent
and clearly understood by students (students can
be involved in developing the criteria)

7. INDIVIDUAL & GROUP PERFORMANCE
COMBINED EVALUATION
Dual
Grading Individual grade (from a Concurent
test) Grading Each group member takes
an examination, students’
&Collaborative scores are used according
to one of dual grading
* Whether all groups
Skills alternatives.
members achieve at or
above a pre-established
criterion, At the same time, each
*Whether the combined student is assessed by the
score shows improvement teacher and/or their peers
over the previous group and/or themselves in terms
score, of the frequency of
*The lowest individual performance of specific
score in the group, collaborative skills.
*The average score,
*The total score.

8. GROUP Kagan
GRADING (1995)
THE CASE AGAINST

9. KAGAN’S REASONS
• Group grading is unfair because two students can do
equally well but receive different grades based on how well
their group-mates performed.
• Group grading makes grades more difficult for others, such
as parents and university admissions to interpret because
they do not know how much of the grade was based on
student’s own work.
• Group grading demotivates students because it blurs the
connection between student effort and grades, thus
violating the key cooperative learning principle of individual
accountability.
• Group grading is a key cause of opposition to cooperate
learning among parents and others, and could potentially
result in legal problems for teachers and schools.

10. KAGAN’S RECOMENDED
ALTERNATIVES
• Use content that is motivating by itself so that
grades will not be needed as a motivation tool.
• Provide written feedback, apart from grades, on
the work of individual students and of groups.
• Have students establish goals for themselves and,
with the help of teachers and peers, assess their
own progress toward htose goals.
• Use non-grade reward, such as recognition in
class newsletters and notes from teachers.
• Give separate grades on the use of collaborative
skills.

11. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Through a variety of strategies, the achieve role of
students in cooperative learning groups can be
extended to student-generated evaluation criteria
and to self and peer-evaluation.
While shifting our students and
ourselves away from a
Instead of the use of grades,
traditional dependency upon
stars, certificates and other
externally generated feedback
external rewards, indeed,
and rewards (Kohn, 1993), we
Cooperative learning can be a
are helping to move students
way of restoring to students the
towards becoming more
inborn love of learning we
autonomous, self reflective, and
humans are capable of enjoying.
responsible.