Discussion: View Thread

Submission: 10582 | Sponsor(s): (MED)
Scheduled: Friday, Aug 3 2007 1:00PM - 2:30PM at <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Pennsylvania</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Convention Center</st1:placetype></st1:place> in Room 112B

Organizer: Misty L Loughry; <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">Georgia</st1:country-region></st1:place> Southern U.;
Presenter: Peter Bamberger; Technion-Israel Institute of Technology;
Presenter: Neal P Mero; Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business;
Presenter: Matthew W. Ohland; <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">Purdue</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">U.</st1:placetype></st1:place>;
Presenter: Greg L Stewart; <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">University</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Iowa</st1:placename></st1:place>;

This session will help participants do well in their use of peer evaluations of teamwork by incorporating best practices that make the experience fairer and more comfortable for team members and less time consuming for faculty. This is important because bad practices that create conflict and competitiveness within teams and deter team members from providing accurate ratings are commonly used. Panelists will present an overview of their research on peer evaluations. After each presentation, there will be time for questions and answers and brainstorming about best and worst practices. Peter Bamberger will speak about his research on peer evaluations and its implications for the validity of peer ratings. His topics will include the purpose of the ratings (summative versus formative); confidentiality versus anonymity of ratings; the potential social consequences of peer ratings for raters, ratees, and the team; and reasons why some raters purposefully assign inaccurate ratings. Greg Stewart will speak about the importance of team members' perceptions of the accuracy of peer ratings. His research shows that team performance is better when team members can predict how their teammates will rate them. He will also discuss the implications of team design decisions for team performance and other team outcomes. Neal Mero will speak about the importance of rater accountability and how accountability can be created in peer evaluation systems. Misty Loughry and Matthew Ohland will speak about the development and use of the Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) instrument and website (located at www.catme.org). This peer evaluation system was developed based on teamwork research and was supported by a large grant from the National Science Foundation. The system provides a theory-based instrument for on-line evaluation, confidential feedback for team members, and detailed reports for faculty that flag rating patterns that warrant special attention. Panelists will discuss the importance of looking at the team average rather than the class average when interpreting peer evaluations. They will also invite the PDW participants to brainstorm solutions to common problems associated with using peer evaluations for class or research purposes. By the end of the session, we will have an integrated list of ways to do peer evaluations well and avoid common practices that reduce the accuracy and usefulness of peer ratings. This relates to the session theme by helping teams to form a more perfect union (by understanding the performance criteria that all members will strive to achieve), to establish justice (by having a fair peer evaluation system), and to insure domestic tranquility (by reducing peer evaluation practices that create conflict in teams and headaches for faculty members).