Assessing and grading student performance in design courses often conflict with one another and often generate uncertainty about their effectiveness in promoting and measuring learning. This paper describes how to effectively administer and facilitate a half-hour, open-forum, teamreview session that validates assumptions about team member contributions and aligns grading with mutually understood performance criteria. The negotiation phase of the team interview rarely changes the instructor's assignment of individual grades from previous sources of information. However, the process has been found to significantly increase students' understanding and acceptance of the grades they receive. Students and faculty gain insight about circumstances leading to less than expected team member performance and how the lessons learned can be used to promote better learning opportunities for future teams. Included are (i) team roles and responsibilities, (ii) team attitude and climate, (iii) time management, (iv) team member contributions and rewards, (v) internal and external communication, and (vi) setting and achieving goals. The process also provides an opportunity to address and resolve lingering issues that affect team performance that are likely to go unprocessed by the team at the end of their design experience. Multiple instructors have effectively used the process to assign valid grades to team members in introductory engineering design and physical science classes. All of these courses feature cooperative learning activities and open-ended projects throughout the term.

No abstract

No abstract