This word learning technique is based on 3 shoe boxes and works as follows. You put small pieces of papers (with a word in your own native language on the one side and the meaning of the word on the other) into the first box. You close the box and shake it well to have the papers mixed (to make sure they always come in a different order). Then you start to get the papers one by one out of the box. If you know the meaning of the word you took, you put it in the second box, if not, you put it back in the first one. You repeat this, with the second and then the third box, until all the words are taken. Two or three days later you take the whole box again and do the same.
By this method, a word only reaches the third box (and finally get out of it) if you really learned it. We implemented this methodology of learning new words to PPC and also developed some word lists (like irregular words, etc.).
(from FreewarePPC.com)
Peer evaluation. Some of the best case studies involve small group work and group projects. In fact, I strongly believe teaching cases this way is the most user-friendly for science faculty and the most rewarding for the students. Nonetheless, even some aficionados of group work don't like group projects. They say, how do you know who's doing the work? Even if they ask for a group project, they argue against grading it. They rely strictly on individual marks for a final grade determination. I'm on the other side of the fence. I believe that great projects can come from teams, and if you don't grade the work, what is the incentive for participating? Moreover, employers report that most people are fired because they can't get along with other people. Not all of us are naturally team players. Practice helps. So, I'm all for group work including teamwork during quizzes where groups almost invariably perform better than the best individuals. But we have to build in safeguards like peer evaluation.
"Social loafers" and "compulsive workhorses" exist in every class. When you form groups such as those in Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Team Learning (the best ways to teach cases, in my judgment), you must set up a system to monitor the situation. In PBL it is common to have tutors who can make evaluations. Still, I believe it is essential to use peer evaluations. I use a method that I picked up from Larry Michaelsen in the School of Management at the University of Oklahoma.
At the beginning of every course I explain the use of these anonymous peer evaluations. I show students the form that they will fill out at the end of the semester (Table 1). Then they will be asked to name their teammates and give each one the number of points that reflects their contributions to group projects throughout the course. Say the group has five team members-then each person would have 40 points to give to the other four members of his team. If a student feels that everyone has contributed equally to the group projects, then he should give each teammate 10 points. Obviously, if everyone in the team feels the same way about everyone else, they all will get an average score of 10 points. Persons with an average of 10 points will receive 100 percent of the group score for any group project.
But suppose that things aren't going well. Maybe John has not pulled his weight in the group projects and ends up with an average score of 8, and Sarah has done more than her share and receives a 12. What then? Well, John gets only 80 percent of any group grade and Sarah receives 120 percent.
There are some additional rules that I use. One is that a student cannot give anyone more than 15 points. This is to stop a student from saving his friend John by giving him 40 points. Another is that any student receiving an average of seven or less will fail my course. This is designed to stop a student from doing nothing in the group because he is simply trying to slip by with a barely passing grade and is willing to undermine the group effort.
Here are some observations after many years of using peer evaluations:
* Most students are reasonable. Although they are inclined to be generous, most give scores between 8 and 12.
* Occasionally, I receive a set of scores where one isn't consistent with the others. For example, a student may get a 10, 10, 11, and a 5. Obviously, something is amiss here. When this happens, I set the odd number aside and use the other scores for the average.
* About one group in five initially will have problems because one or two people are not participating adequately or are habitually late or absent. These problems can be corrected.
* It is essential that you give a practice peer evaluation about one-third or one-half of the way through the semester. The students fill these out and you tally them and give the students their average scores. You must carefully remind everyone what these numbers mean, and if they don't like the results, they must do something to improve their scores. I tell them that it is no use blaming their group members for their perceptions. They must fix things, perhaps by talking to the group and asking how to compensate for their previous weakness. Also, I will always speak privately to any student who is in danger. These practice evaluations almost always significantly improve the group performance. Tardiness virtually stops and attendance is at least 95 percent.
When I look back at the essential methods of case evaluation, I am struck by the fact that they are a mixture of objective and subjective elements. Some things are readily quantifiable and others are a struggle. Just as in courts of law where there are conflicting personalities, evidence, and judgment calls, teachers carry their own prejudices and experiences into the courtroom. The image of a blindfolded justice rendering verdicts in an unbiased, impartial way has always struck me as unrealistic and, in fact, impossible. Justice, to be perfectly honest, must peek now and then and see who the participants are and what their histories are before making a judgment. So should teachers.
|
Table 1: Peer Evaluation Form
This is an opportunity to evaluate the contributions of your teammates to group projects during the semester. Please write the names of your teammates in the spaces below and give them the scores that you believe they earned. If you are in a group of five people, you each will have 40 points to distribute. You don't give yourself points. (If you are in a group of four, you'll have 30 to give away. In a group of six, you'll have 50 points, etc.) If you believe that everyone contributed equally to the group work, then you should give everyone 10 points. If everyone in the group feels the same way, you all will receive an average of 10 points. Be fair in your assessments, but if someone in your group didn't contribute adequately, give them fewer points. If someone worked harder than the rest, give that person more than 10 points. There are some rules that you must observe in assigning points:
Please indicate why you gave someone less than 10 points.
Please indicate why you gave someone more than 10 points.
If you were to assign points to yourself, what do you feel you deserve? Why? |
From Clyde Freeman Herreid's When Justice Peaks: Evaluating Students in Case Method Teaching