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.

Modular Form as a Curatorial Practice

This article discusses a curatorial approach to authorship as a model for thinking about what I describe as an iterative modular poem, a poetic text composed of appropriated segments. As a response to contemporary proliferation of literary and artistic works created by iterative means, i.e. through acts of appropriation, remixing and remediation, the article is an attempt at putting forward ‘the curatorial’ as an emerging paradigm of writing for the twenty-first century. The article approaches established paradigms of authorship, creativity and originality as inadequate with respect to contemporary experimental poetic practices to suggest a shift from creating to collecting and curating as a possible alternative model for thinking about instances of iterative creative writing. The argument focuses on Robert Fitterman’s Holocaust Museum (2011) as an example of an iterative modular poem and a text emblematic of such curatorial approach to authorship.

Validation of a fast method for quantification of intra-abdominal and subcutaneous adipose tissue for large-scale human studies

Central obesity is the hallmark of a number of non-inheritable disorders. The advent of imaging techniques such asMRI has allowed for a fast and accurate assessment of body fat content and distribution. However, image analysis continues to be one of the major obstacles to the use of MRI in large-scale studies. In this study we assess the validity of the recently proposed fat–muscle quantitation system (AMRATM Profiler) for the quantification of intra-abdominal adipose tissue (IAAT) and abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue (ASAT) from abdominal MR images. Abdominal MR images were acquired from 23 volunteers with a broad range of BMIs and analysed using sliceOmatic, the current gold-standard, and the AMRATM Profiler based on a non-rigid image registration of a library of segmented atlases. The results show that there was a highly significant correlation between the fat volumes generated by the two analysis methods, (Pearson correlation r = 0.97, p < 0.001), with the AMRATM Profiler analysis being significantly faster (~3 min) than the conventional sliceOmatic approach (~40 min). There was also excellent agreement between the methods for the quantification of IAAT (AMRA 4.73 ± 1.99 versus sliceOmatic 4.73 ± 1.75 l, p = 0.97). For the AMRATM Profiler analysis, the intra-observer coefficient of variation was 1.6% for IAAT and 1.1% for ASAT, the inter-observer coefficient of variationwas 1.4%for IAAT and 1.2%for ASAT, the intra-observer correlationwas 0.998 for IAAT and 0.999 for ASAT, and the inter-observer correlation was 0.999 for both IAAT and ASAT. These results indicate that precise and accurate measures of body fat content and distribution can be obtained in a fast and reliable form by the AMRATM Profiler, opening up the possibility of large-scale human phenotypic studies.