Who?
Dr Anthony Kyiu, Assistant Professor in Finance, Durham University Business School.
What?
The activity focuses on using micro-task strategies to effectively enhance participation and engagement in a summative group project within a second-year Financial Valuation module.
When?
These activities were implemented over an eight-week period from the third to the last week of the Epiphany term of the 2024/2025 academic year.
Why?
Group work offers significant benefits in education, including the development of collaboration skills and the promotion of peer-to-peer learning. Despite these advantages, many educators remain hesitant to use group work, particularly as a method of summative assessment, due to several challenges. One common issue is “free riding”, where unequal participation among group members makes it difficult to assess individual contributions accurately. To address this, it was necessary to design a system that minimises, if not eliminates, the challenges of unequal participation, coordination difficulties, and potential conflicts.
How?
The assignment required each group to analyse a different UK company and produce a 4,000-word investment research analyst report. The module had an enrolment of 120 students, divided into three workshop groups of 40 students each. To facilitate interaction, assignment groups were formed based on workshop cohorts, ensuring that students were grouped with others from the same workshop. Each group consisted mostly of four members.
The weekly two-hour workshops formed the foundation for the summative group work. The assignment was introduced in the third week of the term, following two weeks of preparatory briefings and group formation activities to help students meet and get to know their teammates.
During the group work phase, students were allocated one hour per workshop session to collaborate on the project. Each week featured a specific micro-task aligned with content taught in the preceding two weeks, allowing the group work to also function as seminar-style exercises. This structure enabled me to observe group progress directly, respond to general assignment queries, and note any absences.
Although groups were encouraged to meet outside of workshop hours if needed, the sessions were designed to allow most of the assignment to be completed during scheduled time. This approach promoted consistent participation and helped avoid scheduling conflicts.
Provisions were made for students unable to participate in group work due to reasons such as disabilities. In such cases, an alternative but equivalent assignment was provided to ensure they could still meet the module’s learning outcomes. While these instances were limited, they required thoughtful and inclusive planning.
How did it go?
The implementation of micro-task strategies yielded several positive outcomes. First, it significantly reduced the issue of free riding. By integrating group work into workshop sessions, it became easier to monitor individual contributions and minimise unequal participation. Second, the approach enhanced the overall learning experience by enabling immediate feedback and support from instructors, thereby enriching the learning process. This led to an impressive submission rate, with 29 out of 30 groups submitting their work on or before the original deadline. Third, the structured workshop schedule provided ample time for collaborative work, reducing the need for students to coordinate outside of class hours.
What’s next?
While weekly interactions and observation of group activities were effective, there are plans to introduce a more formal mid-point check-in. This will allow each group member to provide a detailed account of their contributions and progress. Additionally, although a peer review process was included at the end of the assignment, it was optional and resulted in low participation. To address this, peer feedback will now be a formal component of the assignment, with marks awarded to students who actively engage in the process.