eLaw Journal: Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law

Other issues in the development of the assessment model

Formulation of the topic

Timing

Evaluation of the trial of the assessment model

• Staff responsible for the administration of the unit trialling the model.
• Staff at the coal-face of preparing students for teamwork and marking the assignments.
• External and internal students who completed the trial of the model.

Fostering teamwork skills and overcoming pedagogical difficulties

The Value of Teamwork

'Due to the nature of my work, I am very rarely able to participate in team or group acitivities in my course. This is the one thing I miss about internal studies many years ago. This is obviously contingent upon establishing a good group. It was therefore a pleasure to work with a group of students. It also helped that they were pro-active and flexible. Teamwork is a very large part of my professional career (armed forces) and I therefore am no stranger to the notion. However this was a pleasant change. It has changed my mind about the idea of 'blind dating' and establishing teams with students I do not know.'

'I have enjoyed the exposure to other perspectives on assignment planning and research. My ideas have definitely broadened. It was also beneficial to always have the group available and receptive to discuss concepts and problems.'

'I have found that working with others provides both a more comprehensively researched and polished final product.'

'I found that working with this team was very different from group work in the past as we all contributed equally and had similar goals and attitudes towards studying. Often I prefer to work by myself, rather than with unproductive team members not pulling their weight. However, in this group, I thought it was great how we could use three heads instead of one.'

'I was dreading it. I did not want to be part of a team at all. I thought it was a big waste of time. ...NOW... I can really see the benefits, especially if you are working with people you really trust. I feel my team members were so supportive that they brought out the best in me.'

'At first I thought this assignment would be a waste of my time. I was very cynical about the applicability of this sort of team exercise for the real world. ...NOW... I feel that I have learned a lot about the dynamics of teams and how best to manage projects. We had the opportunity to see different leadership styles and profit from the strengths that each team member brought to the group.'

'I have always been apprehensive about working in teams. As the mother of two children, working full time and studying a full time load, I am very used to working at my own pace. ...NOW... I realise that a far better assignment can be produced. You are able to get the best of everyone's ideas and input and weed out the weaker arguments. Through that you gain a more thorough understanding of what you are working on as you have others there to bounce ideas and questions off. I feel more confident working in a virtual team and now realise the extent to which technology can make teamwork flexible.'

'I have worked in a team environment on a professional basis and have always found it difficult. ...NOW... This experience has been refreshing. I would go so far as to suggest that the three of us generally complemented each other. I would be happy to work in a team again'. [This comment was from a student who, prior to the commencement of the exercise, had lodged an administrative complaint that it was inequitable to insist that external students work in teams].

Table 3

My ability to work in a team has improved as a result of studying in this unit

Table 4

Teamwork has helped my understanding more than working alone

Preparing Students for Teamwork

Table 5

Do you require further resources?

Table 6

Resources were good for revising teamwork

Table 7

Resources were adequate for reference

Table 8

Top 5 Responses:  If you could change one thing about this team what would it be?

Team selection

Table 9

Team Selection Patterns

Self Selected Teams

Table 10

Preselecting my own team minimised my stress in team formation

Table 11

Preselection was the best option for me

Placed Teams

Table 12

Placement was the best option for me

Table 13

Placement minimised my stress in team formation

Analysis of Assignment Performance

Key parameters

• External Students vs Internal Students
• Placed vs Self-selected Groups
• Team Size (2, 3 or 4)[80]
• The stated existence of conflict within the groups

• self-selected teams performed significantly better on average than placed teams. This would tend to lend support to the link between self selection and streaming referred to in Section 1.1 of this paper.
• Teams of internal students performed marginally better on average than external students.
• Teams of three performed better than team of four (however the difference was not significant). Teams of two performed significantly worse than either teams of three and four. A most likely explanation of this is that these teams may have been adversely affected by the withdrawal of a team-member after the teamwork exercise had commenced.
• The effect of conflict did not appear to have any bearing on overall performance.

Criteria

Table 14

The Teamwork Assessment Criteria are clear

Manageability

Suggestions for future implementations of the model

Timing of the exercise

1. Students will have an additional week to form teams.
2. The assessment will remain due in week 9.
3. In order to encourage students to establish contact earlier and ensure that they are holding meetings, (and have practised documenting meetings), the research methodology will be due in week 6, and will take the form of the minutes of the meeting where the students planned their approach to the research assignment. The minutes will be tabled in a tutorial for peer review.[84] This will ensure that students are practising documenting their meetings, that they have established contact, that they have planned their research.
4. For external students, the practice of having face to face meetings where possible will be further encouraged, with perhaps more time allowed at the External Attendance School for an open discussion of student experiences with virtual teamwork.

Conclusions

References

Australian Law Reform Commission (1999), Managing Justice - A Review of the Federal Civil Justice System, ALRC, Report No 89, esp Chapter 2 "Education, Training and Accountability" citing the American Bar Association (1992), Legal Education and Professional Development -An Educational Continuum, ABA Chicago ("MacCrate Report").

Belanger, F., and Jordan, D.H., Evaluation and Implementation of Distance Learning:  Technologies, Tools and Techniques (Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, 2000).

Boud, D., Cohen, R., and Sampson, J., ‘Peer Learning and Assessment’ (1999) 24 (4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 413.

Butcher, AC., Stefani, LAJ., Tario, VN., ‘Analysis of peer, self and staff assessment in group project work’ (1995) Assessment in Education 165.

Cheng, W. & Warren, M., ‘Making a Difference:   Using Peers to Assess Individual Students’ Contributions to a Group Project’, (2000)  5 (2) Teaching in Higher Education 243.

Collis, B., Tele-learningin a Ditigal World:  The Future of Distance Learning (International Thomson Computer Press, London, 1996).

Collis, B., and Moonen, J., Flexible Learning in a Digital World:  Experiences and Expectations (Kogan Page, London, 2001), p 9

Conway, R., Kember, D., Sivan, A., Wu, M., ‘Peer Assessment of an Individual’s Contributions to a Group Project’, (1993) 18 (1) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 45. 

Duarte, D. and Snyder,N., Mastering Virtual Teams:  Strategies, Tools and Techniques that Succeed, (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco 2001).

Falchikov, N. & Magin, D., ‘Gender Bias in Peer Marking’, (1997) 22 (4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 385.  

Freeman, M., ‘Peer Assessment by Groups of Group Work’, (1995) 20(3) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 289.

Garvin, J.W. et al, ‘Group Projects for First-year University Students:  An evaluation’, (1995) 20 Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 273.

Gatfield, T., ‘Examining Student Satisfaction with Group Projects and Peer Assessment’ (1999) 24 (4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 365

Gibbs, G., Assessing More Students, (Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Council, London, 1992)

Gibbs, G., Learning in Teams:  A Tutor Guide, (Oxford Centre for Staff Development, Oxford, 1995).

Goldfinch, J. and Raeside, R., ‘Development of a peer assessment technique for obtaining individual marks on a group project’ (1990) 15 (3) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 210

Gueldenzoph, L., and May, G., ‘Collaborative Peer Evaluation:  Best Practices for group member assessments’ (2002) Mar Business Communication Quarterly 9.

Hanrahan, S. & Isaacs, G., ‘Assessing Self and Peer-assessment:  the students’ views’ (2001) 20 (1)  Higher Education Research and Development 53.

Hart, G. et al, Student Perspectives on the Development of Generic Capabilities at QUT:  Draft Report, presented to the QUT Teaching and Learning Committee, 30 October 2001. 

Henry, J. and Hartzler, M., Tools for Virtual Teams (ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, 1998). 

Hoefling, T., Working Virtually:  Managing People for Successful Virtual Teams and Organisations, (Stylus Publishing, Virginia, 2001).

James, P., ‘A Blueprint for Skills Assessment in Higher Education’, (2000) 25 (4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 353.

Kift, S., ‘First Year Curriculum Review for Generic Competency:  A Law Degree Case Study’, at the Fourteenth International First Year in Education Conference, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, July 2002 [http://www.qut.edu.au/daa/asdu/fye/abstracts02/KiftAbstract.htm  (Accessed 1 November 2002)].

Laurillard, D., Rethinking University Teaching:  A Conversational Framework for the effective use of learning technologies ( 2^nd ed, Routledge, New York, 2002).

Le Brun, M. and Johnstone, R., The Quiet (R)evolution:  Improving student learning in law, (The Law Book Company Limited, Sydney, 1994),

Lejk, M., Wyvill, M., and Farrow, S., ‘A survey of methods of deriving individual grades from group assessments’ (1996) 21 Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 267. 

Lejk, M., Wyvill, M. & Farrow, S., ‘Group Assessment in Systems Analysis and Design:  a comparison of the peformance of streamed and mixed ability groups’, (1999) 24 (1) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 5.

Lipnack, J. and Stamps, J., Virtual Teams:  People Working Across Boundaries with Technology (John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 2000).

Magin, D., ‘A Novel Technique for Comparing the reliability of Multiple peer Assessment with Single Teacher Assessments of Group Process work’, (2001) 26(2) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 139. 

O’Donovan, B., Price, M. & Rust, C., ‘The student experience of criterion-referenced assessment’,(2000)38(1) Innovations in Education and Teaching International 74.

Orsmond, P., Merry, S. & Reiling, K., ‘The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment’, (2000) 25(1)Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 23.  

Queensland University of Technology, Faculty of Law (2001) Overview of  Attributes and Skills,  [https://olt.qut.edu.au/int/lawgrant (Accessed 1 November 2002)].

Queensland University of Technology, Faculty of Law (2001) Table of Core Skills,  [https://olt.qut.edu.au/int/lawgrant (Accessed 1 November 2002)].

Queensland University of Technology, Faculty of Law (2002), ‘Teaching and Learning Development Large Grants Scheme:  Interim Report’, [https://olt.qut.edu.au/law/ASSESSMENT/sec/index.cfm?fa=displayPage&rNum=576131 (Accessed 12 November 2002)].

Radin, M.J., Rothchild, J.A., and Silverman, G.M., Internet Commerce:  The Emerging Legal Framework, (Foundation Press, New York, 2002).

Ramsden, P., Learning to Teach in Higher Education, (Routledge, London, 1992).

Reynolds, A., ‘E-Auctions:  Who will protect the Consumer?’, (2002) 18 Journal of Contract Law 75. 

Stewart, S. and Richardson, B., ‘Reflection and its Place in Curriculum on an Undergraduate Course:  should it be assessed?’ (2000) 25(4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 369.

UNESCO, Distance Learning Systems and Structures:  Training Manual, Report of a Sub-Regional Training Workshop, Vol. II (UNESCO, Bangkok, 1987).

Van den Brande, L., Flexible and Distance Learning, (John Wiley, Chichester, 1993), p xxi.

Appendix - Assessment Model

ASSESSMENT MODEL TRIALLED IN LWB334 CORPORATE LAW

SEMESTER 2, 2002

The detailed study guide available to all students in the unit explains the following:

· The reasons for development of skills in the curriculum,

· The nature of each explicit skill to be developed in the unit and the stage to which these skills will be developed in the unit.  At this level skills are developed to the final stage of skill development. 

· That skill development in the unit is part of a wider program of skill development.  In particular, it is explained to students that these skills have been developed in an incremental, horizontal and vertical manner commencing in the first year curriculum and beyond. 

· The process of skill development.  Each skill is developed through a staged process including instruction on the skill, time and opportunity to practice and reflect, formative feedback and summative assessment. 

· The platform of achievement expected to be attained by students for each explicit skill on completion of the unit.  This information is extracted from the Table of Core Skills (QUT, 2001). 

The Assessment process in LWB334

While the assessment process is designed to provide a reliable measure of skill development, it is also an effective learning task in its own right embedded within the substantive content.   The written instructions on the assessment task provided to students in their study guide are set out below:

Compulsory Group Assignment

The assignment is compulsory and is a measure of your attainment of unit objectives 1-6(c), (d) and (e).

Unit Objectives

At the conclusion of this unit, you will be able to demonstrate:

1. knowledge and understanding of the basic legal principles and the policy issues inherent in those principles relevant to registered companies.
2. the ability to analyse and synthesise the legal principles emerging from the relevant statute law and case law with respect to registered companies.
3. knowledge and appreciation of contemporary legal developments and likely future developments through law reform with respect to registered companies.
4. an ability to give legal advice on hypothetical questions relating to registered companies.
5. an ability to critically analyse legal principles with respect to registered companies and to scrutinise the values and ideologies supporting those principles.
6. skills of (a) effective oral communication, (b) problem solving, (c) legal research, (d) teamwork and (e) written communication within the Corporate Law context.. 

The assignment topic is set out in the study guide.

Working in Teams: The assignment is to be researched and written by a team of three to four students.  Each team is to produce one assignment.  The team approach is designed to assist students in the transition from individual learning at university to performing as a member of a team in the work place.  You should carefully read the material on teamwork available in the study guide, on CMD and on OLT.

Team Formation: Team formation is your responsibility.  You should carefully consider the material in the study guide on Forming Teams.  Unless you choose to form your own team in accordance with the Self-selection Option below, the unit coordinator will place you in a team:

· Self-selection Option: You may form your own teams with internal or external students.  If you choose to pre-select your team, you must advise the unit coordinator of the name and student number of each of your team members by (end of week 3 of semester – insert date).  Your team membership will be final once you have advised the unit coordinator of your team details.

Or

· Placement in a Team: If you do not notify the unit coordinator of the particulars of your self-selected team by (end of week 3 of semester – insert date), then she will automatically place you in a team.  You will not be placed in a team which has self selected.  Your team membership will be final once you have been advised by the unit coordinator of your team details.

Team Acknowledgement: A Team Assignment Acknowledgment Form, signed by each student, must be attached to the assignment.

Research Methodology:  As part of the assignment, your team will be required to complete a Research Methodology.  In the Research Methodology you must outline the steps you took in planning, preparing and undertaking the research assignment.  Further details of how to complete the Research Methodology and samples of a completed Research Methodology have been placed on OLT.

Teamwork Portfolio: As part of the assignment you are required to outline the steps taken by your team to implement your research methodology.  The teamwork portfolio must include a one page summary of how your team operated supported by select copies of team meeting agendas, minutes, reports and action sheets. Aside from the summary, all of these documents should have been generated at your team meetings.  The page limit will restrict the number that you can select to incorporate in your Teamwork Portfolio.  Select those typical of your meetings and those which substantiate the comments made in your summary of teamwork and your self and peer evaluations.  The following resources are available on OLT to assist you in the development of your teamwork portfolio:

· Further information on how to develop your Teamwork Portfolio can be found under the link to Teamwork Skills Resources

· Samples of a completed teamwork portfolio

· Samples of completed minutes, agendas and action sheets

· Proformas of minutes, agendas and action sheets for you to download and use at your team meetings.

Self and Peer Evaluation of your Teamwork: You will be required to submit a self and peer evaluation assessing the performance of each of your team-members and yourself.  This evaluation helps to determine your individual contribution to the team project, including planning and implementation as well as an evaluation of your ability to function effectively in a team.  The self and peer evaluation sheets are available on the OLT site.  You will also find on OLT samples of completed self and peer evaluations.

Additional Support for External students: External students will be offered additional support with the compulsory group assignment.  This additional support will be three-fold:

· Team Formation: External students are free to choose either of the team selection options set out above.  However, if you do not choose the Self-selection Option you may also request that the unit coordinator attempt to place you in a team with students living in your area.  Such a request must be received by the unit coordinator no later than (end of week 3 of semester – insert date).

· Communication and Document Exchange: External students will be offered additional support in order to facilitate communication and document exchange between team members.  A private discussion forum will be set up for teams with external student members.  The forum can only be accessed by members of your team.  You can use the forum to communicate almost instantaneously with one another.  You can also upload documents and links to web pages on your forum. 

· Opportunity for Virtual Teams to meet face-to-face:  Research indicates that virtual teams benefit from at least one face to face meeting.  Time has been scheduled at the external attendance school for your team to have a face to face meeting.  There are no formal activities scheduled for this meeting time.  You may prefer not to conduct a formal meeting in this time, but rather to use this as an opportunity for your team to meet one another.  The unit co-ordinator will be available for extended consultation at the external school, should you wish to discuss any aspect of the teamwork activity. 

Calculating your assignment mark: The compulsory group assignment will be worth 20% calculated as follows:

· 10%      Substantive Content of Assignment

·   5%      Research Methodology

·   5%      Teamwork Score.

The substantive content of your assignment and the Research Methodology will be assessed by a member of the teaching team in accordance with criteria set out in the study guide.  Each team member will receive the same mark for the substantive content of the assignment and for the Research Methodology.

Your teamwork score is calculated by reference to your self and peer assessment of your own demonstrated ability to work in a team.    In the self and peer evaluations you will determine your individual contribution to the team project, including planning and implementation as well as an evaluation of your ability to function effectively in a team.  Your performance will be evaluated against the following criteria:

· holistically, how well you worked within the team dynamic

· regular attendance at all team meetings

· preparation for all team meetings

· active participation at all team meetings

· performance of allocated tasks within agreed time frames

· participation in setting team goals and tasks

· participation in achieving team goals and tasks

· your skill at providing feedback and encouragement to other team members

· overall contribution and involvement in planning and developing the Research Methodology

· overall contribution and involvement in planning and developing the Teamwork Portfolio

· overall contribution and involvement in researching and writing the Compulsory Group Assignment

You will also be provided with feedback from your team-mates on what they have gained most from working with you in a team, what you do particularly well and their advice to facilitate improvement of your teamwork skills. 

Your Teamwork Portfolio will not be separately assessed, but it must correlate with the assertions made in the self and peer evaluations.   

A failure by any member of a team to contribute his or her share to the researching and writing of the assignment will not be grounds for an extension or special consideration for the other members of that team.

Calculating your Teamwork Score: Your teamwork score will constitute 5% of the total marks for your assignment.  Your teamwork score takes into account:

· Self-Assessment: This is your own assessment of your contribution to the team project as indicated in the Evaluation Sheet:  Self Assessment score.

· Peer Assessment: This is your team members’ assessment of your contribution to the team project as indication in the Evaluation Sheet:  Peer Assessment score.

As the self and peer assessment scores may vary from student to student, it is unlikely that all team members will receive the same teamwork score.  Your self and peer assessment scores must be substantiated by the material included in your Teamwork Portfolio.  In the event of a discrepancy, the unit coordinator reserves the right to adjust your teamwork score and may request written reports from all team members on their level of contribution to any aspect of the assignment.

 

Notes

[1] The Australian Law Reform Commission's recent review of the Federal civil justice system concluded that the essential focus of legal education should be on 'what lawyers need to be able to do' rather than what lawyers may 'need to know'. Australian Law Reform Commission, Managing Justice - A Review of the Federal Justice System, (ALRC, Canberra, 1999) Report No 89, Chapter 2, 'Education, Training and Accountability' citing the American Bar Association, Legal Education and Professional Development - An Educational Continuum, (ABA, Chicago, 1992) ('MacCrate Report').

[2] See further W Cheng and M Warren, 'Making a Difference: Using peers to assess individual students' contributions to a group project' (2000) 5 (2) Teaching in Higher Education 243 at 243-244 citing (1) L S Vygotsky, 'The genesis of higher mental functioning' in J V Wertsch (Ed.), 'The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology', (Armonk, New York, 1981), pp144-188 and (2) L S Vygotsky, 'Mind in Society: the development of higher psychological processes', (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1978). See also, T Gatfield, 'Examining Student Satisfaction with Group Projects and Peer Assessment' (1999) 24 (4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 365 at 366 citing J A Mello, 'Improving individual member accountability in small group settings' (1993) 17 (2) Journal of Management Education 253.

[3] M Le Brun and R Johnstone, The Quiet (R)evolution: Improving student learning in law, (The Law Book Company Limited, Sydney, 1994), pp59-60.

[4] See further Gatfield, op cit (n3), p 366.

[5] The criteria have been developed by the Team Leader of the Second Large Grant Project, Ms Sally Kift, Assistant Dean Teaching and Learning, QUT Faculty of Law in conjunction with Dr Duncan Nulty, Higher Education Program Evaluator, QUT Teaching and Learning Support Services. See further: S Kift, 'Harnessing assessment and feedback to assure quality outcomes for graduate capability development: A legal education case study", forthcoming at Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) Conference, Brisbane, December 2002 [http://www.aare.edu.au/index.htm (Accessed 1 November 2002)] ('Harnessing Assessment'); and QUT, Faculty of Law, 'Teaching and Learning Development Large Grants Scheme: Interim Report', (QUT, Brisbane, 2002), [https://olt.qut.edu.au/law/ASSESSMENT/sec/index.cfm?fa=displayPage&rNum=576131 (12 November 2002)].

[6] The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of Ms Aliisa Myolanis, Policy Advisor (Learning Support), QUT Teaching and Learning Support Services in the review of the assessment model prior to its trial.

[7] Six units stated in their unit objectives that students undertaking the unit would explicitly develop their teamwork skills: LWB139 Select Issues in Torts, LWB144 Laws and Global Perspectives, LWB241 Trusts, LWB332 Commercial Law, LWB36

[7] Law of Corporate Governance and LWB434 Advanced Research and Legal Reasoning. Four of these units made no attempt to assess teamwork skill development; only the product of the teamwork was assessed. In two of those four units the teamwork exercise was optional. One unit which did not include the assessment of teamwork skill development in their unit objectives did assess teamwork skill development in a minor way: LWB142 Law Society and Justice where a small component of the assessment of a group oral presentation provided for the summative assessment of 'other skills' which may include teamwork.

[8] For example: S Stewart and B Richardson, 'Reflection and its Place in Curriculum on an Undergraduate Course: should it be assessed?' (2000) 25(4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 369; M Freeman, 'Peer assessment by groups of group work' (1995) 20 (3) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 289; and D Boud, R Cohen and J Sampson, 'Peer Learning and Assessment' (1999) 24 (4) ) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 413.

[9] A number of academics were also invited to address the project group to explain how they undertook the assessment of teamwork in their units.

[10] UNESCO, Distance Learning Systems and Structures: Training Manual, Report of a Sub-Regional Training Workshop, Vol. II (UNESCO, Bangkok, 1987).

[11] D Laurillard, Rethinking University Teaching: A Conversational Framework for the effective use of learning technologies ( 2nd ed, Routledge, New York, 2002), p 145.

[12] Id.

[13] Id.

[14] Ibid, p146 citing RM Palloff and K Pratt, Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace (Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco, 1999).

[15] B Collis and J Moonen, Flexible Learning in a Digital World: Experiences and Expectations (Kogan Page, London, 2001), p 9.

[16] Id.

[17] Id. See further, L Van den Brande, Flexible and Distance Learning, (John Wiley, Chichester, 1993), p xxi.

[18] Belanger, F., and Jordan, D.H., Evaluation and Implementation of Distance Learning: Technologies, Tools and Techniques (Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, 2000), pp4-5.

[19] Id.

[20] Laurillard, op cit (n 12), p146. See also Belanger and Jordan, op cit (n 19), p7.

[21] B Collis, Tele-learningin a Ditigal World: The Future of Distance Learning (International Thomson Computer Press, London, 1996), pp582-583. See also Laurillard, op cit (n 12), p146.

[22] Belanger and Jordan, op cit (n 19), p21.

[23] Ibid, p2.

[24] The value of virtual teams is explored in J Henry and M Hartzler, Tools for Virtual Teams (ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, 1998), pp1-10. See also D Duarte and N Snyder, Mastering Virtual Teams: Strategies, Tools and Techniques that Succeed, (Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, 2001).

[25] See further A Reynolds, 'E-Auctions: Who will protect the Consumer?', (2002) 18 J of Contract Law 75, p.75 and M.J. Radin, J.A. Rothchild, and G.M. Silverman, Internet Commerce: The Emerging Legal Framework, (Foundation Press, New York, 2002), p v.

[26] T. Hoefling, Working Virtually: Managing People for Successful Virtual Teams and Organisations, (Stylus Publishing, Virginia, 2001), p xiv.

[27] Duarte and Snyder, op cit (n 25), p9.

[28] Hoefling, op cit (n 27), p xiv.

[29] J Lipnack and J Stamps, Virtual Teams: People Working Across Boundaries with Technology (John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 2000), p16.

[30] Henry and Hartzler, op cit (n 25), pp 1-10. See also Duarte and Snyder, op cit (n 32), and Hoefling, op cit (n 27), p5.

[31] Duarte and Snyder, op cit (n 25), p9.

[32] Ibid, p10.

[33] Hoefling, op cit (n 27), p6.

[34] Duarte and Snyder, op cit (n 25), p 8.

[35] Id.

[36] Id.

[37] Henry and Hartzler, op cit (n 25), pp7-9.

[38] Hoeffling has offered useful tips to virtual teams in the workplace. Op cit (n 27), pp 159-161). It is submitted that Hoeffling's tips will prove particularly useful to students operating in virtual teams. Virtual tips to avoid traps 'Accept some loss of operational efficiency. This doesn't always happen but its less frustrating when a certain 'acceptable slippage' is allowed. It will be regained in other areas like speed of message delivery.' 'For some team players, who are used to being on teams and are good team players, to move to a virtual team can be a bit jolting at first. One reason that this jolt occurs is that if it's a true team with a lot of interaction, a synergy results.' This synergy may take more time to develop in a teaching and learning environment and may only arise after several virtual meetings, the team meeting at the external school or several face to face meetings. 'One problem with asynchronous communication is dissipation of group energy. The team can start to drift apart without regular contact. Creative brainstorming can fall flat if not moved along. Team leaders must help the group feel that it is together.' Where students are encouraged as part of their learning experience to rotate the leadership role, then team members share this responsibility and essentially ownership of the group 'Confront all non performance. Management responsibilities do not lessen in a virtual environment.' In a virtual learning environment it is particularly important to confront all non-communication in order to reveal whether there are any underlying concerns which need attention. 'Make a special effort to catch conflicts early and deal with them fairly. If there are miscommunications and they don't get acknowledged and remedied, it can lead to trust issues. In a virtual team environment trust issues can go unrecognized, unaddressed and unresolved far too long. In a virtual environmnet, its easier just to sweep conflict under the rug until it becomes a much bigger issue and can't be ignored anymore.'

[39] Lipnack and Stamps, op cit (n 30), p24.

[40] All unit materials are available in the study guide and on the unit's on-line teaching website [https://olt.qut.edu.au/law/LWB334/sec/index.cfm?fa=dispHomePage (Accessed 1 November 2002)].

[41] Skills are developed incrementally through three stages: Level 1 (instruction, opportunity to practice and feedback), Level 2 (advanced instruction, opportunity to practice in a simple legal scenario, feedback and reflection) and Level 3 (students should resourcefully, productively, adaptively and creatively build upon previous skill development and instruction in a more complex legal sceario). Reflection on skill development at Level 3 plays a pivotal role towards attainment. The manner in which skills have been embedded across the various years of the cirriculum ensures that students move incrementally, horizontally and vertically through each stage of skill development.

[42] Although the unit was developing teamwork skill at the highest level of undergraduate skill development (Level 3), it was anticipated that as skills had only been recently inculcated into the curriculum, a significant number of students may not have undertaken earlier units at a time when they had incorporated teamwork skill development. The materials developed for the model drew from and expanded upon materials that had been developed for students in the elective fourth year unit, LWB434 Advanced Legal Research and Reasoning.

[43] The tutorial exercises built upon tutorial exercises already being undertaken in the compulsory second year unit, LWB241 Trusts. The materials for this tutorial can be found on the on-line teaching web site for this unit [https://olt.qut.edu.au/law/LWB334/sec/index.cfm?fa=displayPage&rNum=540463 (Accessed 1 November 2002)].

[44] These discussion forums could be accessed via the unit's on-line teaching website [https://olt.qut.edu.au/law/LWB334/admin/index.cfm?fa=dispHomePage (Accessed 1 November 2002)].

[45] G Hart, Student Perspectives on the Development of Generic Capabilities at QUT: Draft Report, presented to the QUT Teaching and Learning Committee, 30 October 2001, p4.

[46] P Ramsden, Learning to Teach in Higher Education, (Routledge, London, 1992), p7; Freeman at 290; and Boud, Cohen and Sampson at 413.

[47] See L Gueldenzoph and G May, 'Collaborative Peer Evaluation: Best Practices for group member assessments' (2002) Mar Business Communication Quarterly 9.

[48] Id, D Magin, 'A Novel Technique for Comparing the reliability of Multiple Peer Assessment with that of Single Teacher Assessments of Group Process Work', (2001) 26 Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 139 at 140 ('A Novel Technique') citing JK Davis and S Inamdar, 'Use of Peer Ratings in Pediatric Residency' (1988) 63 Journal of Medical Education 647; F Lopez-Real and Y Chan, 'Peer Assessment of a Group Project in a Primary Mathematics Education Course' (1999) 24 Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 67; and Gueldenzoph and May, op cit (n 48), p9 citing T Crews and A North, 'Team Evaluation Part 2' (2000) 16 Instructional Strategies 1.

[49] This would be achieved through the implementation of self and peer evaluation, which are frequently used to overcome inequitable contribution to teamwork. See further M Lejk, M Wyvill and S Farrow, 'Group Assessment in Systems Analysis and Design: a comparison of the performance of streamed and mixed ability groups' (1999) 24 Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 5 at 11 citing M Lejk, M Wyvill and S Farrow, 'A survey of methods of deriving individual grades from group assessments' (1996) 21 Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 267. See also further Cheng and Warren, op cit (n 3), p245; R Conway, D Kember, A Sivan, and M Wu, 'Peer assessments of individual contributions to a group project' (1993) 18 (1) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 45 at 46; AC Butcher, LAJ Stefani, VN Tario, 'Analysis of peer, self and staff assessment in group project work' (1995) Assessment in Education 165 at 165; J Goldfinch and R Raeside, 'Development of a peer assessment technique for obtaining individual marks on a group project' (1990) 15 (3) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 210 and N Falchikov and D Magin 'Detecting gender bias in peer marking of students' group process work' (1997) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 385.

[50] The unit objectives and criteria for assessment were contained in the study guide and were available on the on-line teaching web site for this unit.

[51] Lejk et al, 'Group Assessment in Systems Analysis', op cit (n 50), p11 citing M Lejk, M Wyvill and S Farrow, 'A survey of methods of deriving individual grades from group assessments' (1996) 21 Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 267. See also Cheng and Warren, op cit (n 3), p245; Conway, Kember, Sivan, and Wu, op cit (n 50), p46; Butcher, Stefani and Tario, op cit (n 50), p165; Goldfinch and Raeside, op cit (n 50), and Falchikov and Magin, op cit (n 50). Given the focus of this paper, further issues related to the incorporation of peer and self-assessment in the assessment model will not be explored further in this paper.

[52] These criteria are set out in Appendix 1: The Assessment Model. See further S Stewart and B Richardson, 'Reflection and its Place in Curriculum on an Undergraduate Course: should it be assessed?' (2000) 25(4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 369 at 375 citing G Brown, J Bull and M Pendlebury, Assessing Student Learning in Higher Education (London, Routledge, 1997); Ramsden, op cit (n 54), p6; P Orsmond, S Merry and K Reiling, 'The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment' (2000) 25 (1) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 23 at 23; P James, 'Blueprint for Skills Assessment in Higher Education' (2000) 25(4) Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 353 at 363.

[53] Ramsden, op cit (n 47), p6.

[54] Orsmond, Merry and Reiling, op cit (n 53), p 23.

[55] Stewart and Richardson, op cit (n 53), pp 3

[55] and 370.

[56] B O'Donovan, M Price and C Rust, 'The student experience of criterion-referenced assessment (through the introduction of a common assessment grid)' (2000) 38 Innovations in Education and Teaching International 71 at 79 citing CV Gipps, Beyond Testing (London, The Farmer Press, 1994).

[57] Stewart and Richardson, op cit (n 53), p375 citing J Chapman, 'Agonising about Assessment' in D Fish and C Cole (eds) Developing Professional Judgement in Health Care (Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1988).

[58] The assessment criteria are set out in Appendix 1: The Assessment Model

[59] The self and peer evaluation instrument can be accessed on the unit's on-line teaching website, op cit (see n 45).

[60] Internal students undertook this exercise in class. See further S Hanrahan and G Isaacs, 'Assessing Self and Peer-assessment: the students' views' (2001) 20(1) Higher Education Research and Development 53 at p54-55; and O'Donovan et al, op cit (n 57), p80.

[61] Orsmond et al, op cit (n 53), pp33-34.

[62] O'Donovan et al, op cit (n 57), p80 citing DR Sadler, 'Specifying and promulgating acheivement standards' (1987) 13 Oxford Review of Education 191.

[63] See generally, Stewart and Richardson, op cit (n 53).

[64] Units using these reflections were LWB434 Advanced Legal Research and LWB241 Trusts. The reflection sheets used in the assessment model are available on the on-line teaching site for the unit, op sit (n 45).

[65] Lejk et al, 'Group Assessment in Systems Analysis', op cit (n 50), p7, reported that this view had been supported by student feedback. Gibbs concurs. See G Gibbs, Learning in Teams: A Tutor Guide, (Oxford Centre for Staff Development, Oxford, 1995), p8 ('Learning in Teams'). Lejk et al, 'Group Assessment in Systems Analysis', op cit (n 50), p7 and 11 citing G Gibbs, Assessing Student Centred Courses (Oxford, Oxford Centre for Staff Development, 1995).

[66] Lejk et al, 'Group Assessment in Systems Analysis', op cit (n 50), pp 7 and 11 citing G Gibbs, Assessing Student Centred Courses (Oxford, Oxford Centre for Staff Development, 1995).

[67] Hart, op cit (n 46), pp5-6.

[68] Id.

[69] Lejk et al, 'Group Assessment in Systems Analysis', op cit (n 50), pp 8-9 and 11.

[70] Id.

[71] See further Lejk et al, 'Group Assessment in Systems Analysis', op cit (n 50), pp7-11.

[72] Id.

[73] For reasons of practicality, internal students requiring placement were placed in teams with other students from their tutorial groups.

[74] Gibbs, Learning in Teams, op cit (n 66), p8.

[75] The author wishes to acknowledge the valuable assistance of Dr Duncan Nulty, Higher Education Program Evaluation, QUT Teaching and Learning Support Services in the development of the survey.

[76] If the sample is skewed at all, it is towards students who are able to attend on campus.

[77] Although the responses to these questions indicate a significant neutral response, the results are considered indicative of the trend in student opinion. This is reinforced by the low negative response.

[78] This was illustrated in Tables 1 and 2.

[79] See further Table 4.

[80] Due to a number of students withdrawing from the unit, 8 teams were reduced to teams of 2.

[81] One staff member remarked that the assignments were of a much higher quality those submitted by students individually in an earlier offering of the unit.

[82] Cheng and Warren, op cit (n 3), p244 citing G Gibbs, S Habeshaw and T Habeshaw, Interesting ways to assess your students, (Technical and Education Services Ltd, Bristol, 1986)

[83] A quantitative analysis of results in this assignment is explored below.

[84] External students will undertake an exercise at the external school.