this is about the grading system proposed in cac class by raju sir...
i just cant find any loopholes in that system..his recommendation was tat the group itself shud give a grading list of members based upon their inputs...now, the instructor will grade the quality of assignment comin in...suppose he gives a grade B to the group as a whole...now based upon the grading list provided by group members, the instructor can assign grades to individual team members so that average of the group turns out to be B...of course, we have to assume that the group members act as rational agents..
lets thrash out the nitty-gritty of this system...i think this system would b better than the current one....the current one just cant identify freeriders..nd the efforts of hardworkers r never recognised...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Dear Joseph,
1) I differ with you. I feel the system proposed is utopian behavior which defeats basic need of human psychology to compete or to be superior to someone else (to other human being or to any animal). This competition is not necessarily with rational behavior, otherwise the one who studies more should get more marks in exam but it does not happen and I think there is no consistent logical explanation to that.
2) New system ignores collective efforts and encourages negativity. Group task should not be evaluated only in terms of what it comes on the paper at the end of the day. The role of entertainer, supporter, mediator or cheer leader should also be taken into account. Instead of blatantly throwing F grade at free rider, group should decide whether to continue with the free rider or not. So, I feel there should be a system wherein any group met can be removed from the group if all other group mates decide so.
Well. I am not saying existing system is the perfect grading system but its benefits out weigh its short comings.
Note- Above explanation excludes perpetual free riders.
My thoughts
1) I agree to ur point tat the one who studies most may not top in exam. This is bcos, exam is not only about studyin. If u do not have a critical level of intelligence, u wil not top even if u study day nd nite. So, is ur point tat exam shud only look into the "effort" part, unlike the normal system which evaluates both innate intelligence and effort put in?
Assuming tat u r looking into normal system, I dont think the proposed grading system wil fail. This is bcos, the group members wil usually behave like rational agents(provided they r not allowed to vote for themselves) who wil look into both quality of ideas (innate intelligence) and quantity of ideas (effort part) of other team members. Hence, only a person who has both wil emerge as the star in a group..and vice versa for a free rider.
2) I dont think it encourages negativity. It pushes every member to contribute more to the group. You might have noticed tat freeriders r born only bcos they feel others wil do the work, even if they dont contribute. If this basic assumption is broken, ther wil not b any freeriders. Tat is, a person wil realise tat he personally stands to loose rather than only the group losing if he doesnt work with the neo grading system.
We shud discuss these things further..
Awaitin ur reply...
In my opinion the new system will inculcate a lot of hatred among team members. The reason being that every body wants good grades irrespective of his/her contribution. The group exercises are given so that participants learn how to work in a group and deal with free riders because free riders are in organisations as well.
Dear joseph, no doubt the new system will reduce the problem of free riders to some extent. but i feel the following issues:
1. the very first purpose of group project is to teach people to work in groups, understand the group dynamics and appreciate the problems that arise. freeriding is one of the basic problems. I take it more of a challenge to motivate group members, and affect them rather than affected by them.
2. the problem of free riding will still persist. if your average is c how least you can give to the free-rider, the challenge will still be to fetch contribution out of that free-rider to take group average to b. I do not see many people who are completely resistant to nice words thrown at them to be part of the solution. all human beings are not the same. therefore at the end if we are too much pissed off, we all have an option to ask the instructor not to incorporate his name in the final submission, which will fetch an instant f.
to goel..
pls note tat nobody is hard hearted nough to give a team member F or D jus bcos of his non-performance in a single group task...v give a team member a bad grade only bcos he 'consistently' puts his individual interests above group...when v think bout group members who dont work, y r'nt v thinkin bout hardworkers who dont get wat they deserve bcos of freeriders..if its a choice between justice and rubbing somebody the wrong way, i'l certainly go with the 1st...nd regardin organisations, my personal experience is tat ther is always horizontal feedback..so if a group member is not performin his task, he is either given a bad grade, or thrown out of the group the next time around
to ravi,
1) when ther is a person who does less work in any group, other team members wud certainly encourage him to work harder. At this stage, i personally wud let go of the less workin person with an average grade as v need to give everybody benefit of doubt. but if freeriding continues on a prolonged basis, then ther is certainly a problem. it is only at this stage tat other group members would give bad grade to free rider as they wud have been fed up. to draw a parallel with organisations, most organisations provide promotions to higher level of management based upon peer perception of an individual in addition to his innate capabilities.
2)agreed tat u have 2 learn to work given the constraints. but the question here is about people who do not put in work in spite of nice words. i feel persons who have this attitude of not workin in groups wud never transform themselves one fine morning with nice words (of course, v must make an effort, but v shud also b practical). wat do v do about them. leave alone good words, wat if they dont mend their way even with bad words? shud the group as a whole suffer for this? shudnt ther b some justice at the end of the day..think this way - if some group of 4 acheives a C inspite of 2 free riders, doesnt the 2 hardworkers atleast deserve a final grade of B? the challenge is to built a system which automatically guarantee this, instead of students having to approach teacher to solve their problems..
lets discuss this a bit more...even i have been free rider many time!!!
Every person compares other person with respect to himself consciously or unconsciously. This is very much true at least in the early part of the life. Considering this how far the students will able to judge their quality of contribution to the assignment? How can one assume that group members act as rational agents when they can not work as a group?....i am little confused!!
Post a Comment