Comprehensive Assessment Tracking System

Group Menu Project CUL105/Enhancement

Monday, August 20, 2012 to Thursday, October 18, 2012

Using a SAAC EZ form completed during spring '12,  this CAT documents improvements based upon suggestions in the original document (see attachment).   For Fall '12, the grading rubric was revised, group formation was made earlier, and a group contract was added to the project based upon the document provided by a finished CAT titled "Increasing Group Accountability with a Contract".  Results: 

  • New grading rubric allowed the assessment of the students' performance to be more objective (see attachment), providing insight as to how they scored the grade.
  • Separation of the class into four person groups early in the course allowed for better cohesion amongst one another before the test day, increasing the average final practical grade from 83% to 87%. 
  • The group contract increased responsibilty.  Average ratings of team members amongst themselves went down from 97% down to 88%, suggesting that the contract made students more aware of the work load that each team member completed, holding each other more accountable.


Completed Full Cycle: 
Course Number: 
Assessment of the Month: 
November, 2012


PETAA00009's picture
0 users have voted.

Nice grading rubric! Very comprehensive . . . I submit that you have completed the cycle in that you instituted a new procedure (the group contract) and saw a change in behavior accordingly. Curiously though, when I implemented the group contract, I saw average ratings of team members go up. I assumed this to mean that by instituting the contract, team members became more aware of their responsibilities as a team member, and therefore fulfilled them to a greater extent. However, you look at the contract as heightening the awareness of team members of their teamates. Very interesting . . . !

MARSL33291's picture
1 user has voted.

The new grading rubric is very clear and easy to follow. It's interesting that the average practical grade on the assignment went up, while the students' rating of each others' contributions went down.  I suppose you could average these ratings over s few semesters to see whether they stay relatively stable.

ROSAA00006's picture
1 user has voted.

Steve, it sounds like you completed a full cycle--implementing a change and then documenting the results.  Congratulations for improving the collaborative nature of this assignment by using a group contract.  It sure makes life easier for the instructor, too! 

ERIQF52091's picture
0 users have voted.

That rubric looks amazing!  You can really give students really detailed feedback just by circling or highlighting the area that they fell in.  It also makes it more transparent for students what you are expecting and makes the grading experience feel less subjective.  I was glad to see that average scores went up, but I think that it would be even more telling if you broke out the analysis by rubric components.  Which areas of the rubric did students do the weakest in?  That could give you some "actionable intelligence" to improve the curricula (or to really emphasize a point) in the next class.  It would be awesome to be able to say, "Area X is where most students struggle with, so this is what you need to know..."  Keep it up!