 |
 |
Hi I have been playing around with the WebPA algorithm in a spreadsheet this afternoon. I would welcome some thoughts/advice please. You can see the example here: https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=0AlaZW47BQdRVdDlTWHpMU3JXNDRMMEhYb3lsaWE5b1E&hl=en_GB&single=true&gid=3&output=html I completely understand how the current algorithm works - this is not my issue. The problem I have is illustrated if you compare the marks for Groups A and B. 1. You'll see that both groups received the same group mark (74%) 2. The individual marks are modified by the peer assessment. 3. However, I am really unhappy that one student in Group B ends up with a mark of 97% while the top mark in Group A ends up as 82%. 4. Overall I deemed that the appropriate mark for both presentations was 74% but the calculation ends up awarding one student in one group (which received exactly the same group as the other) a much higher final mark. 5. To me, this does not seem fair. Group B's work was not any better than Group A but, because of a quirk of the system (actually because one student performed particularly poorly in Group B), these students mostly end up with much higher marks. I have always felt uncomfortable about this when using this type of algorithm in the past. The individual mark distribution works fine *within*groups but not when one compared *between *groups. Would there be a way of say capping the top mark at that given as the group mark then all other marks distributed relative to that? Thanks Simon