Blending 'fair dinkum' into group assessment of construction students

Alfred Olatunji, O (2016) Blending 'fair dinkum' into group assessment of construction students. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 12(4), pp. 270-284. ISSN 1557-8771

Abstract

Capable graduates are able to demonstrate excellence as individuals and as team players. This quasi-experimental study develops a framework for peer assessment. Data from 94 students who completed a first year undergraduate unit in construction management were analysed. The 10 criteria reported in this study were used to ensure students within a group are mutually accountable to group learning. Group success can be predicted through the framework. A Cronbach Alpha's reliability estimate of .968 was obtained when the criteria were tested for internal validity. Principal component and scoring factor analyses were used to elicit the relative importance of each peer assessment criterion. All the criteria were relatively close, however the most significant were 'Timeliness of contributions,' 'Reliability of individual's inputs,' 'Value of individual's contributions' and 'Individual's motivation to succeed.' 'Communication' is the least important item. Correlations between the variables were also obtained. Results showed students who were able to learn genuinely in their teams were also the most successful in the unit. The framework elicited in this study adds more depth to extant literature on assessment design, in particular construction educators and students on how team skill can be developed without compromising individuals' commitment to self-competitiveness.;  Capable graduates are able to demonstrate excellence as individuals and as team players. This quasi-experimental study develops a framework for peer assessment. Data from 94 students who completed a first year undergraduate unit in construction management were analysed. The 10 criteria reported in this study were used to ensure students within a group are mutually accountable to group learning. Group success can be predicted through the framework. A Cronbach Alpha's reliability estimate of .968 was obtained when the criteria were tested for internal validity. Principal component and scoring factor analyses were used to elicit the relative importance of each peer assessment criterion. All the criteria were relatively close, however the most significant were 'Timeliness of contributions,' 'Reliability of individual's inputs,' 'Value of individual's contributions' and 'Individual's motivation to succeed.' 'Communication' is the least important item. Correlations between the variables were also obtained. Results showed students who were able to learn genuinely in their teams were also the most successful in the unit. The framework elicited in this study adds more depth to extant literature on assessment design, in particular construction educators and students on how team skill can be developed without compromising individuals' commitment to self-competitiveness.;

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction management education; pedagogy; assessment; academic unit; team work; group task; construction; higher education; university students
Index terms: motivation, experiment, construction management education, commitment, relative importance, university student, higher education, validity, group task, estimate, factor analysis, competitiveness, academic unit, pedagogy, undergraduate
Subjects: teaching methods, statistical analysis, educational institutions, professional education, market analysis, organization, risk assessment, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, financial and cost management, curriculum development, curriculum design, psychology
Topics: Research Practice, Cost Management, Risk Management, Human Resources, Education, Organizational Design
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here