1
00:00:07,980 --> 00:00:10,140
OLIVIER DE WECK:
Assessing student work

2
00:00:10,140 --> 00:00:13,540
as a team has
different challenges.

3
00:00:13,540 --> 00:00:15,390
Of course, the
first thing you do

4
00:00:15,390 --> 00:00:19,600
is assess the output
of the team's work,

5
00:00:19,600 --> 00:00:22,150
whether that's a
requirements set,

6
00:00:22,150 --> 00:00:24,690
whether it's a set
of initial concepts,

7
00:00:24,690 --> 00:00:26,550
whether it's a
presentation that's

8
00:00:26,550 --> 00:00:29,790
given at a preliminary
design review,

9
00:00:29,790 --> 00:00:32,470
whether it's a physical
prototype that they present

10
00:00:32,470 --> 00:00:34,230
as a team--

11
00:00:34,230 --> 00:00:39,150
so that always should be the
first thing that is assessed

12
00:00:39,150 --> 00:00:43,590
is, what is the net output
that the team has produced?

13
00:00:43,590 --> 00:00:47,700
Within that, it is not
always easy to discern

14
00:00:47,700 --> 00:00:49,920
what has been the
individual contribution

15
00:00:49,920 --> 00:00:52,350
since the whole
purpose of the team

16
00:00:52,350 --> 00:00:55,110
is that the sum that
comes out is greater

17
00:00:55,110 --> 00:00:56,770
than the individual parts.

18
00:00:56,770 --> 00:00:58,410
So in the
best-functioning teams,

19
00:00:58,410 --> 00:00:59,910
there is a magic that happens.

20
00:00:59,910 --> 00:01:01,740
There's a synergy that happens.

21
00:01:01,740 --> 00:01:03,660
There's an output
that's only produced

22
00:01:03,660 --> 00:01:07,490
by these synergistic
interactions of all the team

23
00:01:07,490 --> 00:01:07,990
members.

24
00:01:07,990 --> 00:01:13,200
In a sense, trying
to dissect, what's

25
00:01:13,200 --> 00:01:15,180
the individual piece
that everybody did,

26
00:01:15,180 --> 00:01:17,850
is countering this
idea of team synergy.

27
00:01:17,850 --> 00:01:22,350
That being said, we also
need to assess individually

28
00:01:22,350 --> 00:01:25,240
the contributions and the
learnings of students.

29
00:01:25,240 --> 00:01:27,350
And we do this through
a couple of mechanisms,

30
00:01:27,350 --> 00:01:29,700
for example, a peer review.

31
00:01:29,700 --> 00:01:32,160
So you can do a
peer-review process.

32
00:01:32,160 --> 00:01:35,460
It's trickier in smaller
teams than in larger teams.

33
00:01:35,460 --> 00:01:37,920
But if it's done
properly, peer review

34
00:01:37,920 --> 00:01:42,530
can be very effective in not
only helping one understand,

35
00:01:42,530 --> 00:01:46,230
who are the contributors?

36
00:01:46,230 --> 00:01:48,930
And who are the free-riders?

37
00:01:48,930 --> 00:01:50,820
This is always a
big issue in teams,

38
00:01:50,820 --> 00:01:54,000
is that the free-rider
syndrome, where

39
00:01:54,000 --> 00:01:57,310
some team members contribute
significantly less than others.

40
00:01:57,310 --> 00:02:00,570
And this often can be
a source of conflict.

41
00:02:00,570 --> 00:02:03,690
And so understanding
this is important.

42
00:02:03,690 --> 00:02:05,850
But also, have other
mechanisms in the class,

43
00:02:05,850 --> 00:02:08,850
such as an individual
final exam, and then

44
00:02:08,850 --> 00:02:12,210
the other written exam,
which is administered online.

45
00:02:12,210 --> 00:02:13,710
And the other thing
we started doing

46
00:02:13,710 --> 00:02:16,710
is oral exams, which
seems old-fashioned.

47
00:02:16,710 --> 00:02:19,800
But I have to tell you,
in 15 to 20 minutes

48
00:02:19,800 --> 00:02:22,110
of a one-on-one
conversation with a student

49
00:02:22,110 --> 00:02:24,720
at the end of the class,
you really learn a lot.

50
00:02:24,720 --> 00:02:26,160
You learn a lot
about what they've

51
00:02:26,160 --> 00:02:29,700
learned, where they may
still have confusion

52
00:02:29,700 --> 00:02:32,670
or misconceptions, and also the
feedback that they give you.

53
00:02:32,670 --> 00:02:37,250
So I highly recommend to do
oral exams if it's possible.