Group Based Assessments:

The Efficacy of Group Based Assessments in the Classroom

Asher Kreske

Professor Eckert

SSE 3515: Technology and Assessment in Ed

Apr 10, 2023

 Kreske 2

Social Studies is a multidisciplinary subject that requires students to utilize various skills

across multiple fields, such as history, economics, politics, and geography. Within each of these

fields, there are multiple skills necessary for being an effective learner and even educator.

However, the three skills that are vital across the subject of social studies are communication,

critical thinking, and collaboration. While other skills are prevalent, those three are vital to

success in social studies and life. There is no perfect assessment method in any field, especially

social studies. History tests allow educators to view the students' ability to think critically but

allow no insight into their ability to communicate. Economics assessments may require students

to engage in some conversation but allow no insight into their ability to collaborate. The purpose

of social studies is not to jam information into the brains of students. Instead, it is to expand their

view of the world and to create confident and active members of society. An assessment that

allows the educator to gauge the student wholly is essential because it is a gauge of them not just

as a student but also as a person. Group-based assessment promotes collaboration, critical

thinking, and communication which expands a student's skills both in school and as a future

citizen.

Collaboration is an essential skill in life and the classroom. The skill of collaboration

relies heavily on the student’s ability to delegate responsibilities, organize tasks, and adapt to

change on the fly. These tools become increasingly important with different assessments. A

student will not need to use their collaboration skills on a test. A multiple choice test, or even a

short answer test, only assesses their knowledge. Understanding and comprehending history,

politics, and economics is fundamental. However, with the technological shift, the need to

memorize information is changing. That is not to say that students should neglect to learn, but

memorizing facts and dates is a skill that has been replaced by the internet. Tests do not provide
 Kreske 3

insight into how the student performs as an active human being. Collaborative assessments,

however, allow the educator to observe the students in a deeper and more meaningful way. Merle

Richards, the author of Collaboration Uncovered and a retired University Professor, gets into the

importance of collaboration beyond just assessments. He writes, “As people make meaningful

interpersonal connections, an ethic of care…serves as a solid foundation for working

together.”1Collaborative assessments are authentic assessments, and they put the students in a

position to work together. The importance of collaboration is not just in providing a structured

assessment but in creating deeper connections between students. This togetherness promotes

unity, communication, and critical thinking among students. The meaningful interpersonal

connection can often be derived from a social studies assessment. The assessment will aim to

challenge students together, so they must collaborate accordingly. Social studies is more than

understanding history, economics, or even geography. Instead, it helps unite and connect students

through a common ground of information and even assessment.

On track with collaborative assessments, Peter Blatchford, Ed Baines, and Christine

Rubie-Davies were conductors of SPRinG (social pedagogic research into grouping). They

curated groundbreaking research on the efficacy of group-based learning. The outline for their

study is “...Based on small groups, [we] explored the effects of a highly structured cooperative

framework…”2 This study provides a remarkable amount of data on how students acted inside

group work versus outside group work. The authors went to great lengths to calculate and

explain the different scenarios in which the students were on/off task and how that issue arose.

The authors concluded that “Collaborative group work can encourage more connectedness

among pupils”3 The SPRinG study presents promising evidence for group-based assessments.

1
Richards, Merle, 3
2
Blatchford, Peter, Ed Baines, Christine Rubie-Davies, 750
3
Blatchford, Peter, Ed Baines, Christine Rubie-Davies, 760
 Kreske 4

The educators who participated in SPRinG had concerns regarding the system the researchers

employed. The researchers completely overhauled the class system, making every learning

aspect group based. This essay aims not to reinvent the classroom but to introduce concepts that

will assist and benefit students overall. Collaborative assessments can be intimidating but do not

have to require a whole rework of the educational system. A small implementation of a project

that requires groups, a Socratic seminar, a discussion board, etc., are all various ways to

incorporate group-based assessments in collaborative and non-aggressive ways.

With the importance of collaboration comes the need for critical thinking. There is no

practical and useful collaboration without the skill of collaboration. For a successful group

assessment, all students need to be able to think critically. All of the skills necessary for

functional group assessment can be fostered within the social studies classroom. A simple and

effective way to assess students' critical thinking skills is through Socratic seminars. Lynda

Tredway, a Senior Associate for the Leaders for Today and Tomorrow Project, wrote an article

on engaging students through intellectual discourse utilizing Socratic seminars. She writes,

“Conversations…are the backbone of seminar participation. As students consider different—and

often conflicting ideas…they think deeply and critically about concepts.”4 She exemplifies the

importance of critical thinking because it is necessary for an engaging and meaningful

conversation. In social studies, Socratic seminars are an excellent way to engage students in

real-world issues. It promotes discussions on topics that may be controversial and challenging.

Creating an environment for communicating and thinking critically about the issues

posed is crucial to developing a student's skills. Tredway goes on to state, “... when students

actively and cooperatively develop knowledge, understanding, and ethical attitudes and

behaviors, they are more apt to retain these attributes than if they had received them passively.”
4
Tredway, Lynda, 1
 Kreske 5

5
Through the Socratic seminar systems or any system of proctored communication in the

classroom, students engage with one another. They listen, think, and react to real problems for

themselves or people in the past. These connections are far more valuable than telling the

students about an issue. The ability to recognize a problem, discuss it, understand and listen, then

react is essential to critical thinking. This skill can, of course, be developed in other assessment

scenarios, but the voices of other students hold so much importance. Tredway touches on the

idea of peer importance; she writes, “Feelings of self-worth are inextricably tied to feelings of

competence—the ability to independently construct meaning and arrive at thoughtful ideas, and

to be validated for this by others.”6 The student's peers are their most important audience, and

validation from their peers is incredibly important. Encouraging conversation allows students to

prove their ability to think critically about divisive issues and share their knowledge with the

class. Group-based assessments like Socratic seminars encourage students to think critically, not

just for themselves but for the class. Relating to and discussing a topic is immensely powerful

and increasingly critical in a world of dividedness.

Regarding Socratic seminars and intellectual discourse, communication is a vital skill

necessary for life and in the social studies classroom. Effective communication is how students

facilitate ideas, share information, and discuss relevant issues to gain a deeper understanding of

the material or problem at hand. Effective communication is critical to group assessment, a

component that is not considered deeply. Every student can communicate their ideas, whether

orally, in writing, or even artistically; they can conduct themselves in a way to share their ideas.

However, the ability to communicate effectively is a skill that group assessments build upon.

Group assessments require students to collaborate and think critically, so they must communicate

5
Tredway, Lynda, 2
6
Tredway, Lynda, 5
 Kreske 6

effectively. Kristine Prahl published an article in the American Biology Teacher, she discusses

the uses of think-pair-shares in the biology classroom, but the concepts she employs are still

valid within any realm of education. Prahl writes, “The think-pair-share technique also gives

students opportunities to practice communication and problem-solving skills”7 While a

think-pair-share is not the most insightful tool in the means of assessment, it is still valid. A

think-pair-share can be used to build students' communication skills to prepare them for a

meatier assignment. Opportunities to practice meaningful and effective communication are

essential, especially in social studies.

There are other forms of communication outside of think-pair-shares that can be effective

for an assessment. A system called CLAD (Collaborative Learning Assessment through

Dialogue) was developed by two University professors. This system employs a tactic of

inclusivity and the concept of no student left behind. The study was conducted across dozens of

third-grade classrooms. Once again, the study is relevant due to the behavior of students, not due

to the age or material students utilized. The CLAD authors write, “This study contributes to the

already impressive body of evidence which strongly indicates that peer-led discussion fosters

high-level learning among all students.”8 Discussions or, rather, communication between

students during the process of a group assessment proved to be highly effective. The method in

which these assessments were conducted indeed reflects the third-grade class they were held in.

However, the study's findings prove that peer-based discussion benefited overall student

performance. Communication among students in a group-based assessment environment is

advantageous, both for learner retention and building the communication skills of students.

7
Prahl, Kristine, 3
8
Fitch, E. Frank, and Kathleen M. Hulgin, 11
 Kreske 7

Many educators dislike the use of group-based assessment because of the complications it

presents. Students are not the same, and each student has unique abilities and a unique learning

style. Placing a high-scoring committed student with a student who dozes off in class can be

unfair. The balance of work between students will not be equal, which may be the biggest threat

to the efficacy of group-based assessment. The Center for the Enhancement of Teaching and

Learning published an article on group-based learning. One of the many drawbacks of

group-based learning is that “It is difficult to evaluate the contribution of individual students

within group work accurately.”9 There is also no “true” way to assess students this way. While

collaboration, critical thinking, and communication skills are present within a group-based

assessment, many students will not utilize those skills and instead rely on their partners.

Group-based assessments are almost entirely subjective. Unlike a test or even some writing

assignments, the assessment solely relies on the educator's opinion. Collaboration is a tricky

slope; some students work exceptionally well together and outperform everyone else, while other

students with the same level of capability will fail. The system of assessment a teacher chooses

to employ is entirely subjective. Tests have excellent value; there is no subjectivity, and the

student is either correct or incorrect. In group-based assessments, one student may not know,

understand or even comprehend the question, but that is the beauty of creating a collaborative

environment to reinforce and introduce more information.

Group-based assessments, like most assessment formats, are challenging. There will

always be students who far exceed expectations, and there will be students who do the exact

opposite. The importance of assessment lies within the educator, what they are measuring, their

goal, and how it relates to the course. Social study is a vast subject field, using an array of

assessments. Tests and essays are not wrong, and they certainly utilize skills necessary for life.
9
Chan, C
 Kreske 8

However, social studies class aims to create and encourage students to be active members of a

free and democratic society. Collaborating, critical thinking, and communicating skills are

essential to perpetuate a free and democratic society. Without the encouragement and support of

enhancing those three skills, social studies pedagogy is futile.

 Kreske 9

Annotated Bibliography

Hanson, Jana M., and Megan Florestano. 2020. “Classroom Assessment Techniques: A

Critical Component for Effective Instruction.” New Directions for Teaching &

Learning 2020 (164): 49–56. doi:10.1002/tl.20423

Classroom Assessment Techniques also known as CATs is the essential formula or

roadmap for effective teaching strategies. These strategies enable both the

students and the teachers to engage in deeper conversations. CATs promote both

student and teacher reflection which creates a more diverse and effective learning

environment. The name of the game with this source is “effective assessments.”

While this source does not get into the nitty gritty of group based

learning/assessment it provides insight into creating a stronger and more inclusive

learning environment, which benefits group based learning.

Efu, Sandra Ifeatu. 2019. “Exams as Learning Tools: A Comparison of Traditional and

Collaborative Assessment in Higher Education.” College Teaching 67 (1): 73–83.

doi:10.1080/87567555.2018.1531282.

This may be one of my more favored sources. My favorite line in the entire source

is “..it is unclear from the current literature whether collaborative assessments

improve student learning.” That line completely contradicts the entirety of my

thesis. Yet, the comparison of 16 studies is super influential. That said, the thesis

the authors draw is that the evidence is wavering. The wavering evidence is
 Kreske 10

exactly what I need to formulate effective collaborative assignments. The studies

they compare are complied of really important bits of data and information.

Blatchford, Peter, Ed Baines, Christine Rubie-Davies, Paul Bassett, and Anne Chowne.

2006. “The Effect of a New Approach to Group Work on Pupil-Pupil and

Teacher-Pupil Interactions.” Journal of Educational Psychology 98 (4): 750–65.

doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.750.

Perhaps the biggest threat this source poses is the process in which data was

collected. I have tried my best to decipher the numbers and ratios this study

provides, but it is dense. That said, the purpose of this study was to address the

use of effective collaboration in schools, a component of learning the authors

argue is underutilized.

Fitch, E. Frank, and Kathleen M. Hulgin. “Achieving Inclusion through CLAD:

Collaborative Learning Assessment through Dialogue.” International Journal of

Inclusive Education 12, no. 4 (July 2008): 423–39.

doi:10.1080/13603110601121453.

Collaborative Learning Assessment through Dialogue also known as CLAD was a

study conducted in 2003 across thirty third grade classrooms. While this study

does not focus on the age group I am planning on teaching, the findings are really

important. The study utilized collaborative multiple choice quizzes based on

 Kreske 11

reading comprehension. The study proved that the average reading

comprehension rose when compared to individualized reading. This source

provides some really important insight into the effectiveness of collaborative

learning.

Wilson, Mark. “Classroom Assessment: Continuing the Discussion.” Educational

Measurement: Issues & Practice 37, no. 1 (Spring 2018): 49–51.

doi:10.1111/emip.12194.

Based on the way the article is formatted it appears to be more of a dialogue. I

like this source because its full of important viewpoints. There are a few main

points that he makes that stick with me. First he discusses the changes of

assessments in classrooms, today’s assessments are oriented towards the student.

The student oriented assessments have much more positive outcomes. Students

create, or present something, which allows them to be heard. While it does not

dive into the concepts of group oriented assessment it discusses the importance of

student based assessments, which is really the umbrella goal of group based

assessments.

Prahl, Kristine. 2017. “Best Practices for the Think-Pair-Share Active-Learning

Technique Kristine Prahl.” American Biology Teacher (University of California

Press) 79 (1): 3–8. doi:10.1525/abt.2017.79.1.3.

 Kreske 12

The Think-Pair-Share technique is not new at all. However, it is increasingly

important for a variety of reasons. Think-Pair-Shares promotes inter-class

discussions on topics that students grapple with. This source provides very

interesting statistics that are integral for my thesis. The author provides ample

evidence from dozens of other sources on the utility of multi-student based

discussion and work.

Tredway, Lynda. 1995. “Socratic Seminars: Engaging Students in Intellectual Discourse.”

Educational Leadership 53 (1): 26. Geisinger, Kurt F. 2022. “Testing and

Assessment in Higher Education: Uses, Misuses, and Ways Forward.” Assessment

& Development Matters 14 (1): 9–14. doi:10.53841/bpsadm.2022.14.1.9

Socratic Seminars are an incredibly useful tool in the classroom. This is another

way to increase student to student engagement. It promotes students to have their

own opinions and engage in often challenging topics. The author gets into the

details of how to lead socratic seminars with compelling questions and

compelling texts. Socratic seminars also give the educator time to gauge all

students, who have hypothetically equal opportunities to engage.

 Kreske 13

Ali, Salma Sultan. 2021. “Beyond Testing: Seven Assessments of Students and Schools

More Effective than Standardized Tests: D. Meier and M. Knoester. New York:

Teachers College Press, 2017. 145 Pp. ISBN 978-0-8077-5853-3.” Educational

Studies 57 (5): 566–69. doi:10.1080/00131946.2021.1947818.

I find standardized tests to be completely bogus, especially in history. There are

many appropriate uses of standardized tests in plenty of other fields. However, the

memorization of historical facts is not a critical skill, that challenges the brain,

that deeply engages the brain or encourages research. While not all the seven

assessments discussed are my favorite I think there is great importance in

understanding how students engage best. Often, it is through discussion. The big

ticket item in this source is creating assessments that prepare students to be

“useful for democratic citizenship.” Democracy is about the people, if the people

cannot communicate, understand, relay ideas etc. democracy is not effective.

Kamenetz, A. (2015). The test: Why our schools are obsessed with standardized testing –

but you don’t have to be. New York: Public Affairs.

This book is the driving force behind the argument against standardized testing.

The author argues that standardized testing does not promote critical thinking. Again,

tests are necessary in a variety of fields. However, social studies is an evolving web of

information, scaling it down to a standardized test defeats the possibility for new ideas.
 Kreske 14

Removing standardized testing has huge benefits on the retention and excitement of

student learning.

Richards, Merle. Collaboration Uncovered : The Forgotten, the Assumed, and the

Unexamined in Collaborative Education. Westport, Conn.: Bergin & Garvey,

2001.

This book is incredibly dense with information on the efficacy of collaborative learning.

While this book makes no explicit mention of collaborative assessment, Richards

makes great points about how effective collaborative work can be. Assessments

are often a slippery slope, but when done right collaboration can be immensely

effective. On the other hand this book also provides the many drawbacks of

collaborative work among students. Which is equally useful to my research.

Chan,C.Assessment: Assessing Group Work, Assessment Resources@HKU, University

of Hong Kong [http://ar.cetl.hku.hk], 2010

This article is incredibly useful and provides clear and concise explanations on the

use of group based assessments and how to implement them. To be completely honest I

am very unsure about using this source because it appears to be unechecked. Nonetheless

the information the website provides is valid and backed up by other sources I used

throughout this essay.