Topic 3 is about learning in communities and networked collaborative learning. A paradox is demonstrated in the literature. On the one hand, research has demonstrated that there are many positive aspects linked to working in groups. On the other hand, research has also showed that many problems arise, and that students often feel frustrated, and perhaps even disappointed by online learning experiences.

With this blog post I would like to suggest a grading mechanism to stimulate the interest of students, increase student retention, and diminish the risks for frustration. The idea is simple: grades would not be given by the facilitators or the course responsible, or at least not wholly, but by the other participants in the online collaborative project. For example, if there are 5 people participating in a group, students 1 to 4 would give a grade on the performance of student 5. Student 5 would then get as a grade the average of the grades given by her/his peers. The grades could be communicated anonymously to the facilitator, who would possibly have a right to amend the final grade if it appears clearly wrong (for example if a group of students is “against” one of its members, or if the students decide together to give each other high grades with no connection with the performance). An option could be that the final grade is only partly given by the group, the rest being given by the examiner. By so doing, each participant receives a clear incentive to be active during the course, and avoid frustrations felt by the other participants.

Of course, this system has its limits. In groups with very few students, e.g. 2 or 3, it may not be applicable. But for groups with some more students it may be an interesting model to test (it has perhaps already been tested in practice or in research).