Group work

Group work can be a great way to support learning and lends itself to effective assessment. However, it is not without issues. Students often complain about the challenges of working in groups and the Office for Students have raised concerns that some assessment of group work that may result in students unfairly benefitting from the work of others. The LJMU Assessment and Feedback Policy states that any group assessment must be managed in such a way that an individual student’s performance can be differentiated from other members of the group.

This guide will help you think about group work and how you might design, facilitate and mark it more effectively. Scroll down for specific advice on marking group work.

---

Getting the basics right

Implementing group work assignments can be a valuable way to promote student learning, encourage teamwork and collaboration, and develop essential skills such as communication, problem-solving, and critical thinking. However, it can also present challenges that need to be addressed to ensure the success of the group work assignments. Here is some guidance on the best way to implement group work assignments for university students, highlighting the positive benefits and the issues involved:

• Set clear goals and expectations: Before assigning a group work project, ensure that the goals, objectives, and expectations are well-defined and communicated clearly to the students. This will help to ensure that all group members are on the same page and working towards a common goal.
• Establish roles and responsibilities: It is essential to establish clear roles and responsibilities for each group member to ensure that everyone knows what they need to do and when. This can also help to prevent conflicts and ensure that the workload is evenly distributed.
• Provide guidance and support: Academic tutors should be available to provide guidance and support to the groups throughout the project. This can include providing feedback on their progress, answering questions, and addressing any issues that arise.
• Encourage communication: Communication is key in group work assignments. Encourage students to communicate openly and frequently with each other to ensure that they are working effectively as a team.
• Address group dynamics: Group work assignments can be challenging, particularly when working with students with different personalities, skill sets, and work styles. It is important to address any conflicts or issues that arise promptly to ensure that the group can continue to work effectively.
• Evaluate individual contributions: While the group works as a team, it is important to evaluate individual contributions to ensure that each group member has contributed to the project. This can be achieved through peer evaluation, self-evaluation, or a combination of both.

Designing group work across the programme

In designing group work assessments, it is important to recognise the interplay between the process and the product. The focus on the process of working effectively in a group during the early years of a program or course helps students develop essential collaborative skills, such as communication, conflict resolution, and teamwork. By assessing and providing feedback on these process skills, students gain a foundation for producing more effective and high-quality group work products in later levels.

As students' progress through their program, the emphasis can shift towards evaluating the outcomes or products of group work. With a solid foundation in group process skills, students are better equipped to contribute their individual expertise and effectively collaborate to achieve the desired outcomes. Assessments at these later levels can thus emphasize the quality, innovation, and creativity of the group work products, while still recognising the importance of effective group dynamics and process in achieving these outcomes.

By nurturing and assessing the process skills in the earlier years and gradually transitioning to product-focused assessments, students develop a holistic set of skills that enable them to excel in group work. Recognising the significance of both the process and the product empowers students to understand the integral relationship between effective collaboration and the production of high-quality outcomes, fostering their growth as collaborative contributors in academic and professional contexts.

Group allocation

How to create groups

The dominant group allocation is for student to be self-selecting (friendship grouping). It is crucial for staff to consider the potential drawbacks of forming groups based on student friendships. While it may seem comfortable and convenient, it can inadvertently perpetuate echo chambers, hindering diverse perspectives, inhibiting meaningful collaboration as well as leaving those with fewer friends in a group by themselves. Random allocation or purposeful selection, on the other hand, promotes inclusivity, enables the formation of diverse teams, and encourages students to engage with different viewpoints, fostering valuable learning experiences and enhancing interpersonal skills necessary for professional environments. ‘Pair friends’ approach has some merits, this is where students select a preferred friend, and these are combined to form larger groups. A ‘scientific process’ appears to be favourable to students, this is where a tutor lead criteria or rules-based process allocates students to groups (Kelly, 2008).

But students want to be with their friends

To help students recognise the benefits of not necessarily being grouped with friends, it is important to emphasize the potential for personal and academic growth through diverse collaborations. Educators can encourage students by highlighting the opportunity to broaden their perspectives, gain exposure to different ideas, and develop crucial teamwork and communication skills that will be valuable in their future professional endeavours. By fostering an inclusive and diverse learning environment, students can learn to appreciate the value of working with individuals from various backgrounds, enhancing their overall educational experience.

Groups need time to form regardless of the allocation method

A recommended approach for tutors to help groups form and work effectively is to provide structured guidance and support throughout the process. This can include facilitating an initial team-building session where members get to know each other, establishing clear group goals and roles, and encouraging open communication channels. Tutors can also offer regular check-ins or progress meetings to address any issues or conflicts that may arise and provide resources or tools to enhance collaboration, such as project management frameworks or communication platforms. By actively facilitating group dynamics, tutors can promote a positive and productive teamwork experience for all students involved.

Recommended approaches to marking group work

It is essential to avoid the practice of giving all group members the same mark, as it can undermine the fairness and accuracy of assessing individual contributions and demotivate the students to collaborate. Here are three reasons why this approach is problematic:

• Inequitable distribution of effort: Assigning the same mark to all group members disregards variations in effort and individual contributions. It fails to recognise and reward students who actively engage, demonstrate critical thinking, or take on leadership roles within the group.
• Lack of accountability: By providing a uniform mark, students may feel less motivated to invest time and effort in the project, knowing that their grade will not be affected by the performance of their peers. This can result in free-riding behaviours, reduced accountability, and diminished learning outcomes.
• Inaccurate assessment of skills: Each student possesses a unique set of skills, knowledge, and abilities. By attributing the same mark to all group members, tutors overlook the opportunity to assess and provide feedback on individual strengths and areas for improvement, hindering the development of important competencies.

To improve the assessment of group work, tutors can consider:

• Using a combination of assessment types with a group task complemented by an individual contribution.
• Providing marking schema or a rubric that provides explicit details on how the group work will be assessed to reward individual effort.

Please note:
Please ensure that the chosen approach aligns with the validated assessment strategy.

Marking group work

The updated policy now requires that "marking schema for all group assessments must facilitate differentiation between individual students' performance" with the explicit statement that "a single group mark cannot be attributed as standard to all students".

This requirement is crucial for several reasons: it prevents students from gaining marks for work that isn't their own, ensures accountability and motivation within teams, allows for accurate assessment of individual skills and contributions, and provides evidence of authentic learning outcomes that meet Quality Assurance Agency standards for fair and effective assessment practices. The following guidance suggests a range of ways to achieve this differentiation. This includes peer evaluations using tools such as BuddyCheck, individual reflections or reports that complement group outputs, documented tracking of contributions through shared records or task management systems, regular progress check-ins to review individual engagement, and various marking calculation methods that can adjust group product marks based on individual process contributions.

Peer assessment and evaluation

Peer assessment provides an insider perspective on actual contributions to group work and encourages accountability amongst group members whilst developing students' evaluative skills. It also enhances a sense of fairness and democracy in assessment when well-implemented (Ion et al., 2023). Research indicates that students are capable of accurately judging peers' performance in formative contexts, but significant challenges arise when peer marks are seen as contributing to final grades (Sridharan et al., 2019). These could be influenced by friendship bias, over-generous marking, strategic marking, and collusion (Sridharan et al., 2019) and connected with psychological safety factors such as fear of disapproval and social pressure (Vanderhoven et al., 2015)

Recommendations

• Build formative learning opportunities: Students need practice in group work assessment to develop accurate self and peer assessment skills. Provide calibration exercises and exemplars.
• Critical distinction: Make sure you inform students that at LJMU, student group work peer assessments are data that tutors use to inform final grading decisions - students are never directly marking other students.
• Co-creation: Discuss assessment criteria with students (Deeley and Bovill, 2017).
• Technology: Tools like BuddyCheck can support scalability but require thoughtful implementation (Salloum et al., 2019).

Individual reflective journals and portfolios

Reflective journals and portfolios offer an approach to assessing individual contributions in group work while developing critical metacognitive skills. However, the approach requires careful design to address significant challenges around equity, reliability, and resource requirements. Here are some insights from research in this area.

• Students can learn about teamwork through this process: Mayne, (2012) showed that 73 % of Year 3 and 93 % of Year 4 students were capable of learning about teamwork through reflective writing. However, Clarkeburn and Kettula, (2012) found around half of their students only wrote at a descriptive level rather than deeper reflection.
• Reflective writing serves multiple functions beyond simple assessment: It "provides an ideal tool for capturing the individual learning experience (outcomes) and metacognitive processes employed" (Mayne, 2012, p. 239).
• Can reveal hidden issues: Including problems with leadership selection, communication tool usage, and metacognitive weaknesses that wouldn't be visible through product assessment alone.
• Reflective writing can function at a deeper level: particularly when using approaches like the 'metalogic' framework which "deliberately and explicitly invites students to reflect on their emotions as an integrated part of their learning" (Olson et al., 2024, p. 2).
• Students reflect differently if they know it's going to be marked: Multiple studies highlight the way in which student reflections are influenced by applying a grade to their submission rather than keeping them formative.
• Equity and cultural concerns: Some students may struggle more than other groups with this process, they can develop but it will take time (time (Clarkeburn and Kettula, 2012).
• Can act as an early warning of group problems: reflection can be "a real-time intervention tool" that creates "a safety net catching problems before they escalate" (Olson et al., 2024).
• Can be difficult to mark: There is a need to establish a shared criterion between any multiple markers.

Recommendations

• Progressive development approach: Research strongly supports progressive scaffolding (Clarkeburn and Kettula, 2012). This allows students time to develop reflective skills before high-stakes assessment. Consider portfolio approaches combining weekly entries with final synthesis.
• Scaffolding and support: Provide strategic a clear explanation of reflection task (Clarkeburn and Kettula, 2012) and provide prompts such as "How were roles assigned?", "How did members communicate?" (Mayne, 2012).
• Addressing equity: Consider alternative formats (audio, visual) where appropriate.

Contribution matrices, task allocation records and meeting minutes

Contribution matrices provide a systematic way to document and track individual contributions throughout a group project. This approach requires students to maintain shared records of who contributed what, when, and to what standard.

How it works in practice: Students maintain a shared document (spreadsheet, online tool, or Canvas group discussion board) where they log individual contributions including specific tasks completed, ideas generated, decisions made, and time invested. This creates a transparent record that can be reviewed by both group members and tutors.

Implementation recommendations

• Set clear expectations from the outset about the importance of accurate record-keeping.
• Provide templates or tools (shared Microsoft documents).
• Schedule regular check-ins to review and validate entries.
• Include both quantitative measures (hours spent, tasks completed) and qualitative descriptions (nature of contributions, leadership roles).
• Consider having students sign off on each other's entries to enhance accountability.

Assessment considerations

• Use the documented records as evidence during assessment, but supplement with other methods as records alone may not capture contribution quality or informal support roles.
• Consider weighting this data alongside peer evaluation or individual reflection components.

Multi-stage assignments (group and individual components)

This approach combines collaborative group work with individual assessment components, reducing the risk of students benefiting from others' work whilst maintaining the benefits of collaborative learning.

Design approaches

• Sequential model: Group research/planning phase followed by individual analysis or application.
• Parallel model: Group project with simultaneous individual reflection or personal portfolio.
• Integrated model: Group output plus individual components that demonstrate personal understanding (for example individual sections within a group report).

Implementation recommendations

• Ensure individual components genuinely require personal engagement with the subject matter.
• Design tasks where individual work builds meaningfully on or extends the group work.
• Consider having individual components worth 30-50 % of the total assessment to ensure adequate individual accountability.
• Provide clear marking criteria that distinguish group versus individual achievement.

Practical examples

• Group presentation plus individual critical analysis.
• Collaborative research project plus personal reflection essay.
• Team business plan plus individual implementation strategy.

Online collaboration tools with activity tracking

Digital platforms can provide objective data about individual participation patterns, though this approach requires careful interpretation to ensure fairness.

Suitable tools

• Learning management system discussion forums and wikis.
• Collaborative documents (Microsoft 365) with revision history.
• Project management tools (Microsoft Teams).

Implementation considerations

• Acknowledge that not all valuable contributions occur online (face-to-face meetings, phone calls, informal discussions).
• Focus on patterns of engagement rather than simple metrics like word count or number of posts.
• Consider quality indicators such as responses to others' contributions, initiative-taking, and problem-solving.
• Provide training on effective online collaboration to ensure equitable participation.

Assessment approach

• Use activity data to supplement rather than replace other assessment methods.
• Look for evidence of consistent engagement, responsiveness to peers, and constructive contributions rather than simply measuring volume of activity.

Learning contracts and role-based assessment

This structured approach involves students agreeing to specific roles and responsibilities at the project's outset, with assessment tied to how well they fulfil their committed contributions. Development process: Students negotiate and formalise individual roles, responsibilities, and success criteria through a learning contract or group charter. This might include project manager, researcher, analyst, presenter roles, or subject-specific responsibilities.

Suggested contract elements

• Specific tasks and deliverables for each student.
• Quality standards and deadlines.
• Procedures for addressing non-performance.
• Flexibility mechanisms for adjusting roles if circumstances change.

Assessment integration

• Evaluate students against their agreed commitments whilst ensuring contracts don't create artificial barriers to collaborative learning.
• Include mechanisms for peer feedback on how well individuals fulfilled their contracted roles.

Implementation tips

• Provide guidance on creating realistic and fair role and work distributions.
• Build in checkpoints for reviewing and potentially adjusting contracts.
• Ensure all roles contribute meaningfully to learning objectives.

Summary

Each approach has distinct advantages and limitations, and many can be effectively combined. The key is selecting methods that align with your learning objectives, student cohort, and available resources whilst ensuring fair and meaningful assessment of individual contributions.