Search results

This chapter shares ideas about how to encourage students to take responsibility for their individual learning and their role as a team member through the use of team contracts and peer evaluations. We also share how instructors can more easily determine individual grades for team projects. Team contracts can help instill a sense of responsibility, encourage accountability, and add structure by promoting the clarification of task-specific roles. In conjunction with team contracts, peer evaluations can reinforce the responsibilities assigned through the contract. Peer evaluations provide an opportunity for students to objectively and thoughtfully evaluate team member contributions to the collective result and reward individual participants more equitably related to the outcome obtained.

The chapter provides discussion and examples of student-developed team contracts and a sample peer evaluation form along with a discussion of how these documents have been used in the classroom. Using responses from a convenience survey of undergraduate and graduate students, we conclude by examining student feedback to suggest patterns of the perceptions of students toward the use of these tools.

This chapter presents two established pedagogical techniques to increase student engagement, simulations and peer assessment. The use of each technique, its benefits and drawbacks, and how content knowledge and student engagement increase are detailed. While each of the approaches can be utilized independently to create active learning environments, this chapter illustrates the potential to extend these approaches further. An overview of an MBA-level elective on competitive analysis structured around a simulation and peer assessment is presented. The result is a highly interactive and engaging course where the simulation and peer assessments achieve symbiotic benefits. Learning and performance in the simulation is enhanced by the application of competitive analyst reports which are used by peer “clients.” Assessment in turn leads to greater insights to the simulation, and subsequently higher levels of performance on both the simulation and future analysis work. Insights on these instructional methods, their limitations, and potential barriers to adoption are offered with the hope of inspiring others to utilize and experiment with novel approaches for further enhance learner engagement.

While audiences play a key role in the implementation and ultimate success of novel ideas, how audiences are reflected in negotiations about quality within the creative process remains undertheorized. We examine this question through a comparative ethnography of two settings where digital technology use magnifies the countless micro-decisions involved in producing a creative output and considerations of audience evaluation throughout the creative process – Nashville music production and systems biology cancer research. We find that actors encounter a fundamental tension between two competing standards of quality: the technically perfect, processed and ideal versus the empirically grounded, unprocessed and real. We show how actors navigate this tension vis-á-vis three different audiences – internal peers, extended community, and external reviewers – and how this manifests differently across audiences and the arts and sciences, depending on the audience’s expertise. Our study illuminates the tension between the “ideal versus real” in creative processes that is brought to the fore when creating with digital technology, extends extant research on audiences and organizing for creativity, and offers unique insights from our comparative ethnography across the arts and sciences.

Building on sociological research that examines the allocation of rewards in peer evaluations, we argue that the recognition of cultural producers’ work varies with their status and social distance from the audience members who evaluate them. We study the influence of these two mechanisms within the context of the Norwegian advertising industry. Specifically, we looked at how cultural producers’ status and social distance from jury members affect their chances of being honored in “The Silver Tag” – one of the main digital advertising award contests in Norway – during the period 2003–2010. While our findings provide support for status-based rewards allocation, the positive effects of status may be more circumscribed than previously thought. When accounting for the existence of previous connections between audience members and cultural producers, we find that cultural producers are more or less likely to receive an accolade depending on their degree of separation from the audience members. By exposing network-based determinants of consecrating decisions, and suggesting that the positive effects of status may be more circumscribed than previously thought, our findings shed important light on the social foundations of evaluation and, more broadly, the mechanisms of reward allocation in cultural fields.

Contextualizing grammar in second language (L2) classrooms implies making grammar constructs relevant to the learners’ world; affording learners the opportunities to better comprehend and apply these concepts in their own milieus. This instructional design (ID) has been devised to contextualize grammar and to explore learner engagement of pre-service English teachers through Computer-Aided Learning (CAL) and Task-based Learning (TBL) in a technology-driven learning environment. CAL encompasses technology-aided discussions, multi-media presentations, online tests and exercises, and social media deployment. TBL, on the other hand, contextualizes grammar using technology and social network in planning, executing, and presenting four assigned tasks: picture essay, brochure design, dialogue composition, and comic strips illustration. Facebook is the e-portfolio of the class, archiving all group and individual output. The CAL-TBL tandem is propelled by group initiatives and class collaboration evident in group discussions and planning, microteaching, task presentations, peer reviews, and self-evaluations. These initiatives engage learners; empowering students to collaboratively take active part and responsibility for their own learning. The three-hour-class meets every week in a computer laboratory. The post-semester feedback and online poll course design review as well as the University Course Evaluation comments have shown that the ID, from the learners’ perspective, is effective in contextualizing grammar and in engaging learners.

Soon after Dal Lawrence became the first president of the Toledo Federation of Teachers (TFT) in 1967, he began an effort to expand the union’s role in teachers’ evaluations. Throughout most of the 1970s, the union pressed for greater job protection as well as a peer evaluation program for new teachers; a proposal that the school district refused repeatedly over that decade. In the 1981 contract negotiation, however, the district declared itself willing to include the issue, provided that the union would consider an intervention program for nonperforming teachers. This agreement – now in its third decade, despite a number of conflicts between the district and the union over the years – provided a framework for a totally new process of teacher assessment based on peer evaluation, the Toledo Plan (American Educator, 1984; Bradley, 1998b; Lawton, 1996). In the Toledo Plan, for the first time, teachers would be evaluating each other’s work, with real consequences for those who were not able to successfully meet agreed-upon expectations. “The idea of a teacher union evaluating members of its own bargaining unit was so controversial,” noted Gallegher, Lanier, and Kerchner (1993), “that the TFT president Dal Lawrence waited several months before telling a shocked American Federation of Teachers (AFT) executive council what he had done” (p. 158).

Over the past decade the policy debate over improving U.S. public education has focused on market solutions (charter schools, privatization, and vouchers) and teacher evaluation through high stakes standardized testing of students. In this debate, teachers and their unions are often characterized as the problem. Our research offers an alternate path in the debate, a perspective that looks at schools as systems – the way schools are organized and the way decisions are made. We focus on examples of collaboration through the creation of long-term labor-management partnerships among teachers’ unions and school administrators that improve and restructure public schools from the inside to enhance planning, decision-making, problem solving, and the ways teachers interact and schools are organized. We analyzed how these efforts were created and sustained in six public school districts over the past two decades, and what they can teach us about the impact of significant involvement of faculty and their local union leadership, working closely with district administration. We argue that collaboration between teachers, their unions, and administrators is both possible and necessary for any meaningful and lasting public school reform.

Purpose – The author examines the implementation and characteristics of teacher evaluation and explores their associations with improvement in teachers’ practice of constructivist instruction.Methodology – This quantitative study uses statewide longitudinal Teachers’ Opportunity to Learn survey data collected in 2009 and 2010 from middle school mathematics teachers in Missouri and estimates a series of value-added models with two-level Hierarchical Linear Modeling.Findings – Teachers in this study were mainly evaluated by principals who conducted classroom observations and held face-to-face meetings to evaluate teaching practice and professional development activities. The study provides empirical evidence and support for the use of multiple evaluators with multiple evaluation data and outcomes in teacher evaluation. Additionally, it highlights the potential benefits of focusing on teachers’ instructional data instead of student achievement in teacher evaluation in order to improve their teaching practice.Research limitations – This study focused on middle school mathematics teachers in a single state in the United States. Whether these findings can be generalized to teachers of other subject areas or grades, or to states with different policy contexts, or to countries with country-specific structural, cultural, and social differences is unknown.Value – This study is the first effort to systematically examine teacher evaluation practices across a single state and provide empirical evidence on the relationships between the implementation characteristics of teacher evaluation and improvement in teachers’ instructional practice. Findings of this study provide school, district, state, federal, and international policymakers and administrators with important, up-to-date information on teacher evaluation at the middle-school level in the United States.