English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

The use of group work activities is increasing in Higher Education because of well-known educations benefits, e.g. student have to apply technical knowledge to the project at hand engaging them in deeper learning, as well as they develop team work and other professional skills. However, the assessment of the group work is challenging. Giving the same mark to all group members causes concerns among students and staff, both in terms of ‘free riders’ and mark fairness. One way of addressing both these issues is to use Peer Assessment of Individual Contribution to group work, namely IPAC. However, many academics are reluctant to use this methodology. Two main reasons are (i) that some feel nervous about giving “power” to the students to mark peers and how this would affect the final marks, (ii) that implementing this method can be administratively quite time consuming. This paper presents insights in both these concerns. This is of interest to anyone organizing and running assessed student group work activities, and that is using or might want to use in the future the IPAC methodology.

IS IT SAFE TO USE PEER ASSESSMENT OF INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTION LEVEL WHEN ASSESSING GROUP WORK?