Fairness in assessing group projects: a conceptual framework for higher education

Group projects form a large and possibly growing component of the work undertaken for assessing students in higher education, and especially in post-graduate work in business. Yet the assessments sources, methods and purposes result in an array of combinations that the literature fails to capture in its full complexity. Tutors may be able to assess the work of the group as well as they might the work of any individual. But grades - and degrees - are awarded to individuals. Writers on higher education speak of using self- and peer-assessment as a way of qualifying the evaluation of group work so as to differentiate between individuals. But these commonly used terms - drawn from approaches to assessing individual work - are ambiguous or even misleading in the context of group work. This paper proposes a framework for discussing the assessment of group projects in an effort to help identify how the benefits of group learning and be translated into fairer summative assessments.

An exploratory taxonomic study of IMP Group conference papers

The paper describes exploratory research into the nature of IMP conference papers with particular focus on content. A qualitative analysis of the proceedings of the 16th annual IMP conference is presented. The results provide insights into the diversity of academic thought that fuels the development of the IMP network and allows us to begin charting the development of knowledge structures within past IMP conferences. Of particular interest are, firstly, the tentative knowledge structure that emerges, secondly, the depth of analysis that emerges from using multi dimension coding and thirdly the utility of the process of successive categorisation.