Making assessment of group work fairer and more insightful for students and time-efficient for staff with the new IPAC software

Universities and professional bodies increasingly recognize the educational benefits of students working in group projects. However, both staff and students have concerns about the fairness of the assessment when all the team members get the same mark. In particular, this leads to poor student experience and numerous complaints of ‘free ridders’. One increasingly popular way of addressing these concerns is via the use of the IPAC methodology, i.e. Individual Peer Assessment of Contribution to group work. The IPAC methodology allows academics to give an individual mark to students that participated in a group work activity, and this is based on their contributions as seen by their peers. This is welcome by the students Who claim are the best people to judge the contribution, tackle associated problems, and encourages student engagement and professional behavior during group work. A working group of academics was formed at University College London to look into the IPAC methodology and identify a solution that could be implemented across the institution. After extensive conversations, it was clear that there was a general agreement among practitioners that the IPAC methodology should be used, however there were multiple views on how this should be done in practice. For instance, there are different formulas that can be used to combine the “group mark” and the “IPAC value” into the “individual marks”; different questions and scales that are used to ascertain the level of contribution; different opinions of the feedback that should be given back to the students from the available information; or even if self-assessment should be included; different moments on time when the peer assessment could take place, etc. On the other hand, the implementation of the IPAC methodology is very staff-time consuming without a tool (3-4 full working days for an 80-students class). This includes collection of students’ views and assessment of their peers, selecting and organizing data corresponding to each student, calculating IPAC values and giving each student their individual feedback, etc. In practice, this means that without a tool to make this process efficient, IPAC is not always used even if beneficial. Therefore, an automatic IPAC tool or software is needed, but this needs to be adaptable to the user. This paper presents some priority requirements for the IPAC tool that I identified from extensive literature reading, own experience and numerous conversations with other staff members. The paper also presents a new IPAC tool designed and developed in view of these priorities, which include extensive customization, quick and personalized feedback to students and staff-time efficiency. This paper and software is useful to any academic/teacher setting and assessing group work

Is It Safe To Use Peer Assessment Of Individual Contribution Level When Assessing Group Work?

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

An investigation of the suitability of Artificial Neural Networks for the prediction of core and local skin temperatures when trained with a large and gender-balanced database

Neural networks have been proven to successfully predict the results of complex non-linear problems in a variety of research fields, including medical research. Yet there is paucity of models utilising intelligent systems in the field of thermoregulation. They are under-utilized for predicting seemingly random physiological responses and in particular never used to predict local skin temperatures; or core temperature with a large dataset. In fact, most predictive models in this field (non-artificial intelligence based) focused on predicting body temperature and average skin temperature using relatively small gender-unbalanced databases or data from thermal dummies due to a lack of larger datasets. This paper aimed to address these limitations by applying Artificial Intelligence to create predictive models of core body temperature and local skin temperature (specifically at forehead, chest, upper arms, abdomen, knees and calves) while using a large and gender-balanced experimental database collected in office-type situations. A range of Neural Networks were developed for each local temperature, with topologies of 1–2 hidden layers and up to 20 neurons per layer, using Bayesian and the Levemberg-Marquardt back-propagation algorithms, and using various sets of input parameters (2520 NNs for each of the local skin temperatures and 1760 for the core temperature, i.e. a total of 19400 NNs). All topologies and configurations were assessed and the most suited recommended. The recommended Neural Networks trained well, with no sign of over-fitting, and with good performance when predicting unseen data. The recommended Neural Network for each case was compared with previously reported multi-linear models. Core temperature was avoided as a parameter for local skin temperatures as it is impractical for non-contact monitoring systems and does not significantly improve the precision despite it is the most stable parameter. The recommended NNs substantially improve the predictions in comparison to previous approaches. NN for core temperature has an R-value of 0.87 (81% increase), and a precision of ±0.46 °C for an 80% CI which is acceptable for non-clinical applications. NNs for local skin temperatures had R-values of 0.85-0.93 for forehead, chest, abdomen, calves, knees and hands, last two being the strongest (increase of 72% for abdomen, 63% for chest, and 32% for calves and forehead). The precision was best for forehead, chest and calves, with about ±1.2 °C, which is similar to the precision of existent average skin temperature models even though the average value is more stable

Non-invasive and wearable early fever detection system for young children

Fever in young children is taken seriously by healthcare professionals as it indicates an underlying infection which can be life-threatening. Core body temperature can be accurately measured using traditional techniques, but these are not suitable for non-invasive monitoring during normal life. This study investigates the possibility of fever monitoring in children under 2 years of age in a non-clinical setting based on various local skin temperatures. Various system designs are presented, i.e. single vs multi-sensor systems, and a set of sensors either localized or distributed across the body. The probability of positive fever identification on feverish children ranges from ~40% to 77% using 1 and 5 sensors respectively, while the detected false positives are a 10%. We conclude that a continuous and non-invasive fever monitoring in children under 2 years is possible by the propose method, providing a suitable solution for early fever detection and alert

Making research-based education more successful: Improving critical thinking and engagement through well-directed peer assessment

Universities increasingly recognize the need to train students using research-based education, using their discipline knowledge within group practical activities and to develop their critical thinking and teamwork skills to prepare them for their careers after graduation. With that in mind, students carry out substantial research-based projects many of which are in groups. These research-based projects may take the form of short labs, longer projects within a module during term time, or intensive one or two-week long full-time projects. In these cases, students may work together in disciplinary or multidisciplinary teams. In addition, some MEng students have a group project in the 3rd or 4th year of their degree that traditionally accounts for an equivalent of 2 taught modules. Despite the well-accepted educational benefits of getting students to work in research-based activities and in teams, some issues can detract from the student experience, i.e. (i) critical thinking skills are needed but difficult to obtain; and (ii) dissatisfaction with the assessment of group work. This paper presents work aimed at overcoming these two issues. Acquiring critical thinking is challenging and requires practice. Academic staff should implement long-term approaches to facilitate it. Introducing students to the critical analysis of someone else’s work early on in their degree programme is an excellent way of developing critical skills. We have incorporated this via peer assessment activities (e.g. of a report, a set of calculations, etc.) that initiates students in reviewing and constructively criticizing peers’ work. This stretches them because assessing a piece of work can be harder than completing the work itself, requiring a deeper understanding of the material and of alternative approaches. However, there are problems with traditional peer assessment which include (i) student disengagement leading to provide poor feedback to their peers, and (ii) students lacking confidence in their peers’ marking skills, and therefore the mark obtained. We have developed and successfully run for the past 3 years a new method of peer assessment (360 degree peer assessment) that addresses these main two issues, providing a better experience for students, and a successful tool for academics to foster and support the students’ critical thinking development. In the simplest way of assessing group work, the project deliverable (e.g. a report, a prototype, a video) is assessed and all members of the team would receive the same mark regardless of their individual effort. This leads to various problems: (i) dysfunctional behaviour and uneven participation, with some students not contributing their share; and (ii) frustration of high-performing students who do not see their work as being recompensed. Often, the mark will include an individual component, but it is either based on a separate piece of work (not practical to mark neither encouraging students into the group spirit), or they are set by the tutor based on some criteria considering the attitude of the individual in the group with just partial information. Alternatively, various practitioners have started to include an element of individual peer assessed contribution (IPAC) to team work. With this approach, each student in the group receives a mark based both on the overall “group mark” but also on the individual’s personal contribution towards the final product. This contribution is assessed directly by their peers, who are more aware of each team member’s contribution, and encourages self-reflection. However, the IPAC factor needs to be carefully assessed and applied. Following some initial work on the field, Pilar Garcia-Souto set up the IPAC Consortium whose ultimate goal is to “Identify a method for peer assessment of individual contribution in group work, develop or obtain an appropriate tool to implement it, and disseminate these across UCL and beyond; showing how to make the practice successful and efficient.” This consortium is currently formed by 40 members of staff from over 20 departments across UCL, and includes teaching staff in a range of fields (biomedical engineering, mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, physics, management, archaeology, architecture, culture, etc.), educational researchers (e.g. the Centre for Advanced Teaching and Learning, and the Institute of Education), and support staff (e.g. from the Digital Education and e-learning environment department). In this paper we will talk of our achievements so far and make recommendations for practitioners. In summary, this paper explores how a well-thought peer assessment method can aid students to develop critical thinking skills and allow academics to address group work assessment concerns, such that Research-based Education is more successful. Our approach is scalable and should appeal to anyone interested on incorporating or updating research-based education activities, regardless if you are designing a small activity within a module or a full programme of studies

Co-ordinating assessment across a programme

Assessment within a degree programme is critical for providing summative grades and formative feedback on specific pieces of work. Incorporating different forms of assessment into a programme provides students with opportunities to develop a wide range of skills beyond core disciplinary knowledge. Examples include research-based assessment, outward facing assessments aimed at different audiences, and authentic assessment linked to professional workplace practice. The opportunity to develop relevant professional skills is particularly important in an accredited engineering programme. The modular approach to programme development, prevalent in the UK, where different modules are often developed autonomously and assessed independently can make it difficult to introduce broader, creative assessment practices and can lead to heavy reliance on one method. For example, all module organisers might feel that their module is best assessed through written reports. Even if this is the most appropriate assessment mechanism for each individual module, we postulate that over the programme as a whole, students might learn more if they are required to submit a range of different types of outputs. By spreading this assessment portfolio across modules, we can develop and test a wider range of skills even while reducing the total assessment load. We will give examples from a programme that uses a combination of traditional assessments, authentic workplace-like assessments, research-based assessments, and assessment for different audiences. The paper examines the individual module compromises which may need to be made if assessment is to be seen holistically, to create programme-wide balance to maximise student development

360 degree peer assessment to train engineering students in giving good quality feedback

Engineering degrees need to incorporate activities to develop the students' skills and confidence in constructing quality feedback, and ability to critically analyse someone else's work. These skills are highly linked with what industry expects from graduates, and implicit requirements to gain accreditation from UK professional bodies such as The Institution of Engineering and Technology. This paper reports how a novel method of peer assessment called 360 degrees peer assessment (360PA) was used to train students to give good and insightful feedback to a piece of work, while addressing some of the traditional peer assessment limitations. 360PA was successfully applied to a variety of typical engineering assignments (technical reports, research dissertations, presentations and mathematical problems). Students and staff's quantitative and qualitative feedback were collected. Our experience suggests that the incorporation of various 360PA assignments during the degree is beneficial. Staff praise the method, students feel that 360PA has better prepared them to construct feedback (score 4.0/5), and the quality of the feedback provided by the students is consistently high (∼85 ± 5%). Recommendations for practice are given. Our approach is scalable and should appeal to anyone interested in improving students' engagement with their feedback, or in helping students to develop such critical skills, regardless of class size

Characterization of bespoke force sensors for tailored applications

Bespoke force sensors made with active polymer composites are inexpensive, thin and flexible, hence popular in wearable electronics, however their wider application is limited due to the lack of literature studying their voltage response related errors. We present the voltage response characterization of bespoke force sensors made with an active polymer composite, silver coated fabric, stainless steel thread and silver epoxy. Characterization of the effects of static and dynamic loading was completed with a mechanical testing machine. Static tests consisted of loading and unloading at 0.01, 0.1, 0.5 and 1 N/s, and drift tests for 120 minutes up to 10 N every 1 N. Dynamic tests consisted of a sinusoidal load of 5 N ± 1 N applied at 0.05, 0.1 and 0.5 Hz for 60 minutes. The force-voltage relationships were modelled using an exponential function. Maximum mean drift error was observed when applying different static loads for 120 minutes each. Drift error is minimal at 5 s (<1%)and at 60 (< 5%) minutes with loads under 1 N. Maximum hysteresis of 18% was observed at a 1 N/s loading rate. The maximum drift error after one hour of dynamic loading was observed at 0.5 Hz and is minimal (-0.00004%). The cost of fabricating these sensors is very low compared with commercially available options. These sensors can be fabricated in any shape and size with the added advantage of being able to set the location of the electronic connections as desired

Improving students' critical thinking and communication skills

University engineering faculties, professional engineering institutions and industry increasingly recognize that higher education should support students to develop key professional skills such as critical thinking and communication skills. This paper examines three activities aimed at teaching these skills, i.e. practical open-ended group activities; discussion with experts or as experts; and peer assessment. These methods were assessed in terms of student and staff opinions, but also practicality. Our research indicates that it is beneficial to integrate and balance these three types of activities within engineering degrees as they complement each other. Our findings and conclusions can be applicable to any engineering degree, whether the aim is to incorporate the teaching of these skills in a small activity within a module or a full programme of studies