Supporting student group work


This resource came about as a result of a Westminster Change Academy (WCA) Project “Supporting Student Group work” lead by John Begg in the University of Westminster Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment. It is intended to provide guidance for staff using assessed group work.


At an institutional level, the WCA project is aligned with the University’s tradition of providing vocational education together with the current Learning and Teaching Strategy, which includes the desire to embed employability, enhance professional standards, and specific goals to develop and prepare students for their future professional lives. Improving students’ ability work as part of a team and improving students’ experience of group work are all in alignment with the University 2020 Strategy, which seeks inter alia to:

  • Improve the overall employability of students;
  • Improve employability at key points in the student journey;
  • Ensure all University of Westminster students graduate with the graduate attributes that enable them to be highly employable, socially responsible and globally engaged citizen;
  • Improve the Student Experience Survey and National Student Survey scores by increasing options for student personal and professional development.

The academic, professional and personal practice competencies associated with team working are also noted within the following Graduate Attributes: ‘Literate and effective communicator’ and ‘Entrepreneurial’.

Furthermore, the University’s Employability Strategy aims to “Incorporate employment-related skills and competencies (including career management skills) across all our undergraduate courses through the Learning Future initiatives as an intrinsic part of ‘Transforming Learning & Teaching’, ‘Curriculum & Assessment’, structured ‘Academic Support’ and represented as ‘Westminster Distinctiveness”.


Peer-based group work has been widely accepted as an active learning method that facilitates the acquisition of a wide range of academic, social and work based skills including: critical thinking; problem solving; interpersonal skills; communication, negotiation, and the ability to work collaboratively as part of a team to solve real-world problems (Barfield, 2003; Burdett, 2003; Gatfield, 1999).

Group learning is advocated by accrediting bodies, educators and employers in response to the need to prepare graduates for the workplace where teamwork skills and communication are a valued (Buckenmyer, 2000; Burdett, 2003; Colbeck et al, 2000; Wood, 2009). Group work is viewed as an effective teaching and learning strategy (Gatfield, 1999) because it provides opportunities for students to negotiate meaning with others and to reflect on their learning (Fraser & Deane, 1997 cited by Burdett, 2003:180). Webb et al (2005:65) state that peer-based learning provides opportunities to engage more actively with subject matter. Likewise, working collaboratively with others can increase achievement (Johnson & Johnson, 1999; Oakley et al, 2004; Slavin, 1995). The solution to complex problems requires individuals to collaborate to reach a solution (Burdett, 2003:178). Group work is claimed to promote greater academic success and strengthen social interaction because students are placed in situations where they must cooperate with one another (Burdett, 2003:178). A central tenet of collaborative learning is that of a more knowledgeable student taking the role of teacher; if a student is capable of providing an explanation they have effectively demonstrated achievement of their own learning (Magin, 2006:115). For students to acquire competencies in group work they need to be exposed to working in teams (Lejk and Wyvil, 1996). The advantages of group work are summarised here: Advantages and student perceptions of teamwork.

Student opinion of group work varies. Most students appreciate the benefits of group work but struggle with group dynamics. The most common complaints are that group members do not contribute equally (Barfield, 2003; Burdett, 2003; Caspersz et al, 2003; Knight, 2007; Winter & Neal, 1995); unfairness around marking due to unequal contribution (Burdett, 2003; Norberg, 2008); and difficulties with communication, arranging meetings and group dynamics (Burdett, 2003; Caspersz et al, 2003). Motivated students resent group members who do little or no work, and feel forced to take on the work of recalcitrant group members (Burdett, 2003). Many students take a strategic approach to group work by dividing the tasks amongst the group members. Oakley et al (2004:11) describe this phenomenon as “a divide and conquer policy.”  Consequently, teams are rarely cohesive (Tipping et al, 1995:1052). Student perceptions of group work are summarised here: Advantages and student perceptions of teamwork.

Course designers need to be aware of students’ inexperience when considering use of group work and students need guidance and training in new role behaviour, interpersonal group dynamics, and conflict management before the behaviour can be effective (Walker, 2001; Burdett, 2003; Latting and Raffoul, 1999). The difficulties and time associated with process learning may interfere with academic learning and the time associated with group skills training may interfere with teaching specific technical content of the module.

In research conducted by the WCA project, student’s reported  (n=708) the need for the following support in order to help them to learn to work as part of an effective team:

  • Tutors to monitor progress and contribution
  • Training in teamwork
  • Assessment to account for individual input (emphasis on contribution not quality!)
  • Communication difficulties, with each other and tutors
  • Team selection
  • Time management

The research also sought to determine whether staff required development or additional resources to better support students’ teamwork. 59% answered this question, but no common themes emerged. Of those who responded, some staff:

  • Requested guidance or training in managing/supporting student teams
  • Requested guides for students
  • Indicated the need for consistency of practice/marking
  • Asked for training in VLE support and VLE assessment
  • Noted the need for additional time for teaching teamwork, managing teams and marking team assignments

Key questions for course designers when considering the use of assessed teamwork

  • Does the course require student to acquire team-related skills? (The academic, professional and personal practice competencies associated with team working are noted within the University of Westminster’s Graduate Attributes: ‘Literate and effective communicator’ and ‘Entrepreneurial’ ).
  • Are there course level learning outcomes related to the acquisition of team-related skills?
  • Where will team-related skills be taught? (At course level or module level? At Level 4 only or throughout the course?) Skills include: Forming and keeping agreements; negotiation, taking on different roles; communication; presenting ideas and listening to others; challenging assumptions; time management; problem solving; dealing with team dynamics, dealing with social loafers and absenteeism; collaborating to create a coherent and consistent output etc.
  • Which module(s) will be used to deliver teamwork?
  • Do the module(s) have learning outcomes that are constructively aligned with the acquisition of team-related skills?
  • Has a rationale for the use of team based assessment(s) been provided in the module handbook? (Example teamwork rationale for module handbooks)
  • How will the assessment account for individual contribution to any team based assignment, and allow for the highest level of intellectual contribution?
  • What support will the module team provide for students working in teams? (see below).
  • How will the module team ensure that the support is consistent? (It may not be possible to provide sufficient support on large modules due to staff and resource constraints, in which case team based assignments should not be used).

Recommendations when using assessed teamwork

  • Replace the term ‘group work’ with ‘teamwork’
  • Teamwork should not be used as the means to reduce marking workloads.
  • Aim to share the knowledge and experience of the student body.
  • Develop a culture of knowledge sharing and collaboration in a team environment.
  • Seminar tutors need to have sufficient staff development and expertise in this area to be capable of effective moderation and facilitation.
  • Provide students with early training in teamwork at Level 4.
  • Limit teamwork at Levels 5 & 6 e.g. no more than 25% teamwork per 20 credit module i.e. only 5 credits associated with teamwork.
  • Teamwork can be employed where there is a desire for students to acquire team-related skills.
  • There should be associated Learning Outcomes constructively aligned with the teamwork activity in the module descriptor. (Examples of learning outcomes)
  • It follows that the group process should be assessed as well as the academic product.
  • There must be a means whereby individual input is accounted for within the assessment. Peer assessment is just one way of accounting for this. (see Resources and Links section below). Consider moving from summative to formative/summative assessment (as per Learning Futures recommendations) e.g. formative feedback on team tasks with summative assessment on individual write up. Alternatively, set a team based task that leads to individual assessment. For example, teams could be asked to collect, share and discuss articles for an individually assessed literature review. An example can be found here: Example 10% Team 90% individual assessment
  • Decide whether you wish to allow students to form their own teams, have tutor formed teams or randomly assigned to teams. Gibbs (2009:4) suggests: “Allowing students to form their own teams is likely to have a similar impact as streaming – the high ability students will tend to form teams with each other and the low ability students will be left with other low ability students to work with. The fairest option is therefore to construct mixed ability teams but to make sure that high ability students who contribute more have their greater contribution recognised in their individual mark so that they are not unfairly penalised by being obliged to work with lower ability students. “
  • The amount of time to be spent on teamwork should be stated clearly in the module handbook.
  • The academic and work based rationale for teamwork needs to be explained clearly in the module handbook to ensure that students fully understand why they need to comply with the guidelines (and contract, if used). (Example team learning contract with tutor formed terms | Example team learning contract for students to add terms)
  • Provide an introduction to teamwork session in which teamwork is presented as an opportunity to acquire academic and work related skills and competencies. Explain the common pitfalls and ways to avoid them.
  • Ask students to circulate angendas (Example Meeting Agenda), keep minutes of meetings (Example Meeting Minutes), record attendance, and emphasize the need for regular team discussions.
  • Prior to commencing teamwork students should be briefed about engagement expectations and this information should be included in module handbooks.  Be prepared to intervene in if a team experience issues with a member not participating (Gibbs, 1995). This may involve the tutor appraising whether this is intentional or accidental through discussions with the team.  Evidence may be obtained by reviewing documents (e.g. minutes, actions plans, blogs, email) that students are using to manage their teamwork. If such incidences are verified, tutors should support students to manage the consequences in relation to communicating with the student concerned and the repercussions for their group assessment (Gibbs, 1995).
  • Identify the support measures provided and explain that these have been provided to address the common student complaints associated with teamwork.

Support measures to help students negotiate teamwork

Some or all of the following support measures could be provided when students are required to undertake assessed teamwork:

  • Conduct ice breaker and team building exercises.
  • Provide advice on project planning and progress checking. Consider interim reports and feedback points.
  • Establish ground rules relating to behavioural issues and expectations at an early stage.
  • Consider the use of a Team Learning Contract or Team Agreement i.e. a policy statement on expected behaviour, procedure for working on assignments, and strategies or penalties for dealing with loafers (Latting & Raffoul, 1991; Lindblom-Ylänne et al, 2003). It is also important to set group goals (Latting & Raffoul, 1991; Winter & Neal, 1995), which can also be written into the agreement. In principle, such agreements help unite the group and serve as a ‘quasi-legal’ document to prevent students making invalid claims about what they were supposed to do (Oakley et al, 2004). (Example team learning contract with tutor formed terms | Example team learning contract for students to add terms)
  • Ensure teams have individual roles, either staff assigned or student formed. Explain the importance of roles and consider role forming exercises. Encourage role rotation: Team leader, minute taker, checker etc.
  • Provide class time devoted to team meetings with tutor(s) on hand to offer advice and answer questions. Practice “Management/monitoring by walking around”.  Observe meetings and encourage all team members to participate in discussions. You might need several staff members depending on class size. Require students to present draft work at meetings to identify progress/lack of progress and monitor individual attendance and contribution.
  • Encourage students to solve their own problems both in terms of the specific requirements and team dynamics. Oakley et al’s (2004) “Coping with hitch hikers” exercise emphasises the importance of self-reliance and empowerment to solve their own problems and for staff mediation as final resort when students are unable to resolve their team-related problems.
  • A clear method for dealing with social loafers to be set out in the module handbook (this can be linked individual accountability within the assessment).
  • Consider peer assessment or the use of the “Knickrehm method.” With the latter, the tutor makes an expert academic judgement about the quality of the product (such as a project report) while the students peer review the individual behaviours and quantity of various types of contribution to that product (Gibbs, 2009).
  • Provide time for students to practice the peer assessment process in class mid-semester as a progress check.
  • Encourage students to use written evidence of behaviour and contributions in order to assess fairly e.g. personal contribution records, meeting minutes
  • Consider assessing meeting minutes, as experience has shown that record keeping is often superficial when it is not assessed
  • Consider the use of penalties or sanctions e.g. “Two card trick” in Maiden & Perry (2011:453).
  • Use the groups facility on Blackboard to provide each team access to online communications including: a wiki, discussion board, file exchange and email.
  • Remind students of the ‘Learning Support’ link that is available on all Blackboard pages. Other sources of student support here.

We do not recommend the use of assessed teamwork if the module team does not have sufficient staff or resources to provide the support noted above e.g. mega module.

Advantages of teamwork table with references

Advantages of teamwork table with references


Table of Student perceptions of teamwork with references

Student perceptions of teamwork with references

Downloadable Word version of tables above: Advantages and student perceptions of teamwork.

Example LOs and rationales

Examples of learning outcomes for modules using team based assessment

  • Level 4: Work collaboratively to identify problems and formulate responses.
  • Level 5: Interact effectively within a team; identify targets in consultation with others within a team, establish responsibilities and working arrangements, analyse problems and formulate solutions
  • Level 6: Develop, maintain and encourage constructive working relationships within a team; take on a leadership role and resolve conflict through negotiation. Utilise management skills, techniques, and systems to successfully deliver a project from inception to engagement, whilst meeting the requirements of constraints within the project.

Example rationale:

Teamwork enables the module team to assign more challenging and complex projects to teams than to individuals. Teamwork provides students with opportunities to share information and learning, and work together towards a common goal, while at the same time practice interpersonal, presentation and negotiation skills, and be exposed to points of view beyond those of the lecturers. Teamwork also gives opportunities to acquire communication and time management skills via team meetings and discussions etc.

This module has been designed to facilitate the development of team working skills, including running and participating in meetings, presenting and explaining research findings, seeking clarification, and reaching agreements. The portfolio-based coursework has been designed to develop research seeking and problem solving skills together with the ability to synthesise a wide range of technical information. Decision making is improved when teamwork is employed. Hansen (2006) notes an increased demand for teamwork in business: “Most organisations use self-managing teams in the workplace, and employers consistently mention collaboration and teamwork as an essential skill in almost all working environments. Employers need staff who can work effectively with others, and seek graduates who can analyse and evaluate a wide range of information, and find solutions to problems. These are skills that require the higher level thinking that derives from active and cooperative learning” (Hansen, 2006, pp11-19).

Additional information informing rationale:

The Credit Level Descriptors prescribed by Appendix B of the Higher Education Credit Framework for England: Guidance on Academic Credit Arrangements in Higher Education in England (QAA, 2008), include, inter alia, the achievement of group outcomes (Table 3)

Table 3. Generic Credit Level Descriptors (HE credit framework for England 2008, p19)

Generic Credit Level Descriptors (HE credit framework for England 2008, p19)

Generic Credit Level Descriptors (HE credit framework for England 2008, p19)

Level Learning accredited at this level will reflect the ability to:

  • Level 7 display mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge and skills, employing advanced skills to conduct research, or advanced technical or professional activity, accepting accountability for related decision making, including use of supervision.
  • Level 6 critically review, consolidate and extend a systematic and coherent body of knowledge, utilising specialised skills across an area of study; critically evaluate concepts and evidence from a range of sources; transfer and apply diagnostic and creative skills and exercise significant judgement in a range of situations; and accept accountability for determining and achieving personal and/or group outcomes.
  • Level 5 generate ideas through the analysis of concepts at an abstract level with a command of specialised skills and the formulation of responses to well-defined and abstract problems; analyse and evaluate information; exercise significant judgement across a broad range of functions; and accept responsibility for determining and achieving personal and/or group outcomes.
  • Level 4 develop a rigorous approach to the acquisition of a broad knowledge base; employ a range of specialised skills; evaluate information, using it to plan and develop investigative strategies and to determine solutions to a variety of unpredictable problems; and operate in a range of varied and specific contexts, taking responsibility for the nature and quality of outputs (QAA, 2008).

Guidance for staff

Gibbs, G., (1995) Learning in Teams: Tutor Guide. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development. (Library catalogue number: 378.1795 GIB)

Jaques, D. & Salmon, G., (2007) Learning in Teams: A handbook for face-to-face and online environments, 4th Ed. Abingdon: Routledge (Library catalogue number: 378.1795 JAQ, also available as an online resource via Library Search)

Learn Higher group work video resource:

Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, Volume 25, Numbers 3 and 4 (2014) Special Focus Issue: Small-Group Learning in Higher Education—Cooperative, Collaborative, Problem-Based, and Team-Based Learning [Online]  Available from: (Accessed 08/06/15) (Fifteen articles on cooperative, collaborative, problem-based and team-based leaning).

Maiden, B. and Perry, R. (2011). Dealing with free-riders in assessed group work: results from a study at a UK university. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36 (4), 451-464. Available from

McAlpine, M.,  (nd) The use of wikis for assessing collaborative learner achievement [Online]  Available from: (Accessed 31/05/15)

Moon, J., (2009) Making group work: improving group work through the principles of academic assertiveness in higher education and professional development. Bristol: HEA Escalate [Online]  Available from: (Accessed 31/05/15)

Plymouth University, (2013) Guidelines for Group work and its assessment [Online]  Available from (Accessed 31/05/15)

Race, P., (2015) The lecturer’s toolkit: a practical guide to assessment, learning and teaching, 4th Ed. London: Routledge. Chapter 10: Working with others. (Library catalogue number: 378.125 RAC, also available as an online resource via Library Search).

Wood, C., (2009) How to help your students with group work. Westminster Exchange, University of Westminster [Online] Available from: (Accessed 29/05/15).

Guidance for studentsb

Cottrell, S., (2013) The study skills handbook, 4th Ed., Palgrave Macmillan. (Chapter 10: Working with others). (Library catalogue number: 371.30281 COT )

Gallagher, K., (2013) Skills development for business and management students, 2nd Ed. Oxford OUP (Chapter 11, teamwork skills). (Library catalogue number: 658 GAL).

Gibbs, G., (1994) Learning in teams: A student manual, Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development. (Library catalogue number: 378.1795 GIB)

Gibbs, G., (1995b) Learning in Teams: Student Guide, Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development. (Library catalogue number: 378.1795 GIB)

Learn Higher ‘Working with Others’

Learn Higher group work video resource:

University of Westminster training and study skills:

Students or teams of up to six may book an appointment with an Academic Learning Advisor at:

Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology online group work tutorial:

University of Reading study advice: Effective group work:

Working in Teams, Tony Burke, FABE:

Effective meetings, Tony Burke, FABE:

Resources and linksb


Example Teamwork Assignment Brief

Examples of learning outcomes for module using team based assessment

Example Introduction to teams powerpoint. (Very long, feel free to adapt)

Class exercise: Improving Team Performance

Example team learning contract with tutor formed terms

Example team learning contract for students to add terms

Example coursework brief for Team Learning Contract

Example team agreement proforma

Example marking scheme for tutor & peer assessment for use with ‘Example peer assessment proforma’ below.

Example team peer assessement proforma using the Knickrehm method. You may use the assessment criteria provided or allow students to agree their own criteria in class. (* Alternative criteria here). Do bear in mind that for any peer assessment system to work, students need to be trained in the use of the system. This version requires individual team members to self-assess first (see ‘Example self-assessment in team work proforma’ below).

This is just one of many peer assessment systems available (see Lejk & Wyvil, 1996 and Perry 2008).  However, peer assessment is not just assignment of numbers. It is more successful when students are able to give and receive feedback from each other. The free online PAS system enables students to give each other anonymous feedback and marks that can be used by tutors (NB users must agree that the owners can use the date for their own research):

Another easy to use free online peer assessment tool is WEBPA:

Example self-assessement in teamwork proforma for use with ‘Example peer assessment proforma’ above.

Simplified version of peer assessment proforma. A stand-alone self-evaluation exercise

Example self-evaluation.

Example team planning & progress proforma (Adapted from an original template created by Tony Burke, FABE).

Example team meeting agenda (Tony Burke, FABE)

Example team meeting minutes (Gallagher 2013)

Example team planning & progress proforma

Alternative peer assessment criteria

1.    Regular attendance at group meetings
2.    Contribution and research
3.    Ability to explain research findings to the group
4.    Teamwork and initiative
5.    Attention to the task

1.    Attends group meetings regularly and arrives on time.
2.    Contributes meaningfully to group discussions.
3.    Completes group assignments on time.
4.    Prepares work in a quality manner.
5.    Demonstrates a cooperative and supportive attitude.
6.    Contributes significantly to the success of the project.

1.    Reliable & responsible (Pulling own weight)
2.    Enthusiasm: Hardworking, motivated
3.    Organised
4.    Flexibility and communication; willing to listen and act upon feedback (Open minded, cooperative)
5.    Respectful & Supportive

1.    Was the team member reliable and responsible? Was the team member organised, take the initiative and perform as an effective team member?
2.    Was the team member willing and able to communicate effectively with the team?
3.    Did the team member display a satisfactory work ethic by contributing, undertaking research and paying sufficient attention to the tasks?
4.    Was the team member a good listener, and able to accept positive and negative feedback?
5.    Did the team member display knowledge of their own strengths, the strengths of other team members, and put this to use for the benefit of the team?


Barfield, R. L., (2003) Students’ perceptions of and satisfaction with group grades and the group experience in the college classroom. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28:4, 355-370.

Buckenmyer, J. A., (2000) Using teams for class activities: Making course/classroom teams work. Journal of Education for Business, 76:2, 98-107.

Burdett, J., (2003) Making teams work: University students’ perceptions. International Education Journal, 4:3. 177-191.

Caspersz, D., Wu, M. & Skene, J. , (2003) Factors influencing effective performance of university student teams. Research and Development in Higher Education, 26.

Colbeck, C. L., Campbell, S. E. & Bjorklund, S. A., (2000) Grouping in the dark: What college students learn from group projects. Journal of Higher Education, 60-83.

Dolmans, D. H. & Schmidt, H. G., (2006) What do we know about cognitive and motivational effects of small group tutorials in problem-based learning? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11:4, 321-336.

Gibbs, G., (2009) The assessment of group work: lessons from the literature [Online] Available from: (Accessed 31/05/15).

Gatfield, T., (1999) Examining Student Satisfaction with Group Projects andPeer Assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24:4, 365-377.

Gokhale, A. A., (1995) Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical thinking, Journal of Technology Education, 7:1 [Online] Available from:  (Accessed 11/04/12).

Hansen, R.S., (2006) Benefits and problems with student teams: Suggestions for improving team projects. Journal of Education for Business, 82:1, 11-19.

Harland, T., (2002) Zoology Students’ Experiences of Collaborative Enquiry in Problem-based Learning, Teaching in Higher Education, 7:1, 3-15.

Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T., (1999) Making cooperative leaning work.  Theory into Practice, 38: 2, 67-73.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. & Smith, K., (2007) The state of cooperative learning in postsecondary and professional settings. Educational Psychology Review, 19:1, 15-29.

Knight, J., (2004) Comparison of student perception and performance in individual and group assessments in practical classes, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 28:1, 63-81.

Latting, J.K. & Raffoul, P.R., (1991) Designing student work teams for increased learning: An empirical investigation, Journal of Social Work Education, 27:1, 48-59.

Lejk, M. & Wyvil, M., (1996) A survey of methods of deriving individual grades from group assessments,  Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21:2, 267-280.

Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Pihlajamäki, H. & Kotkas, T., (2003) What makes a student group successful? Student-student and student-teacher interaction in a problem-based learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 6:1, 59-76.

Magin, D.J., (2006) Collaborative peer learning in the laboratory, Studies in Higher Education, 7:2, 105-117.

Mello, J. A., (1993) Improving individual member accountability in small work group settings, Journal of Management Education, 17: 253–259.

Maiden, B. & Perry, B., (2011): Dealing with free‐riders in assessed groupwork: results from a study at a UK university, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36:4,451-464. Available from

Norberg, D., (2008) Group projects: more learning? Less fair? A conundrumin assessing postgraduate business education, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33:5,481-492.

Oakley, B., Felder, R.M., Brent, R. & Elhajj, I., (2004) Turning Student Teams into Effective Teams, Journal of Student Centred Learning, 2:1, 9-34.

Pauli, R., Mohiyeddini, C., Bray, D., Michie, F., & Street, B., (2008) Individual differences in negative group work experiences in collaborative student learning. Educational Psychology, 28:1, 47-58.

QAA. (2008). Higher education credit framework for England: guidance on academic credit arrangements in higher education in England [Online]  Available from: (Accessed 29/05/15)

Slavin, R.E., (1995) Cooperative learning, 2nd ed. Needham Heights, M.A.: Allyn & Bacon.

Summers, M. & Volet, S., (2010) Group work does not necessarily equal collaborative learning: evidence from observations and self-reports. European journal of psychology of education, 25:4, 473-492.

Tipping, J., Freeman, R. F., & Rachlis, A. R., (1995) Using faculty and student perceptions of group dynamics to develop recommendations for PBL training. Academic medicine, 70(11), 1050-1052.

Walker, A., (2001) British psychology students’ perceptions of group-work and peer assessment. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 1:1, 28-36.

Webb, N.M., Nemer K.M. & Ing, M., (2006) Small-Group Reflections: Parallels Between Teacher Discourse and Student Behaviour in Peer-Directed Teams, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15:1, 63-119.

White, F., Lloyd, H., Kennedy, G., & Stewart, C., (2005) An investigation of undergraduate students’ feelings and attitudes towards group work and group assessment. Research and Development in Higher Education, 28: 618-623.

Winter, K. & Neal, J.C., (1995) Group writing: student perception of dynamics and efficiency of teams, Business Communication Quarterly, 58:2.

Wood, C., (2009) How to help your students with group work. Westminster Exchange, University of Westminster [Online] Available from: (Accessed 29/05/15).


Perry, B., (2008) An introduction to mini cases on ways of dealing with “free riders” [Online]  Available from: (Accessed 20/05/15)

Pokorny, H. & Griffiths, D., (2010) Exploring the ‘myths’ of enhanced learning through group work assessment. In: Kemp, P., Atfield, R. & Tong, R. (eds.) Enhancing learning through assessment in in business and management, hospitality, sport, leisure and tourism. Newbury: Threshold Press.

Comments are closed.