Peer Rating for Feedback in Group Projects

The National Student Survey (NSS) in the UK has since 2005 questioned final year
undergraduate students on a broad range of issues relating to their university experience.
Across disciplines and universities students have expressed least satisfaction in the areas of
assessment and feedback. In response to these results many educational practitioners have
reviewed and revised their procedures and the UK Higher Education Academy (HEA) has
produced guidelines of best practice to assist academics in improving these specific areas.
The Product Design and Development (PDD) degree at Queen’s University Belfast is
structured with an integrated curriculum with group Design Build Test (DBT) projects as the
core of each year of the undergraduate programme. Based on the CDIO syllabus and
standards the overall learning outcomes for the programme are defined and developed in a
staged manner, guided by Bloom’s taxonomy of learning domains.
Feedback in group DBT projects, especially in relation to the development of personal and
professional skills, represents a different challenge to that of individual assignment feedback.
A review of best practice was carried out to establish techniques which could be applied to
the particular context of the PDD degree without modification and also to identify areas
where a different approach would need to be applied.
A revised procedure was then developed which utilised the structure of the PDD degree to
provide a mechanism for enhanced feedback in group project work, while at the same time
increasing student development of self and peer evaluation skills. Key to this improvement
was the separation of peer ratings from assessment in the perception of the students and the
introduction of more frequent face to face feedback interviews.
This paper details the new procedures developed and additional issues which have been
raised and addressed, with reference to the published literature, during 3 years of operation.

The efficacy of a CDIO based integrated curriculum as preparation for professional practice in product design and development

The School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Queen’s University Belfast started BEng and MEng degree programmes in Product Design and Development (PDD) in 2004. Intended from the outset to be significantly different from the existing programmes within the School the PDD degrees used the syllabus and standards defined by the CDIO Initiative as the basis for an integrated curriculum. Students are taught in the context of conceiving, designing, implementing and operating a product. Fundamental to this approach is a core sequence of Design-Build-Test (DBT) experiences which facilitates the development of a range of professional skills as well as the immediate application of technical knowledge gained in strategically aligned supporting modules.
The key objective of the degree programmes is to better prepare students for professional practice. PDD graduates were surveyed using a questionnaire developed by the CDIO founders and interviewed to examine the efficacy of these degree programmes, particularly in this key objective. Graduate employment rates, self assessment of graduate attributes and examples of work produced by MEng graduates provided positive evidence that their capabilities met the requirements of the profession. The 24% questionnaire response rate from the 96 graduates to date did not however facilitate statistically significant conclusions to be drawn and particularly not for BEng graduates who were under represented in the response group. While not providing proof of efficacy the investigation did provide a good amount of useful data for consideration as part of a continuous improvement process.