Flipping the Script: Group-Level Assessment as Critical Pedagogy

• In Event: Participatory Research as Democratic Pedagogy: Using Group-Level Assessment for Planning, Learning, and Meaning Making

Abstract

Purposes
This paper explores the utility of the participatory action research method “group-level assessment” (GLA) (Vaughn & Lohmueller, 2014) as an adaptable tool for participatory course construction and learning assessment in the higher education classroom. In this practitioner inquiry project, I discuss my experience using the GLA framework in an undergraduate professional development and career planning course. My intention in using the GLA was to break down perceived barriers of authority in the teacher-student relationship and invite my students to be co-creators of the course content. In this paper, I aim to illustrate the utility of the GLA (and, in turn, other participatory action research methods) as pedagogical tools that can democratize higher education classrooms and encourage adult students to feel an increased sense of ownership of their learning experience.

Theoretical Framework
My use of the GLA is rooted in the shared values of critical pedagogy (Freire, 1970/1993) and participatory action research (Brydon-Miller & Maguire, 2009) that call us to challenge existing power structures and make space for all voices in our teaching and our research. Freire (1970/1993) encourages a model in which students are active participants in the learning process—they are “critical co-investigators in dialogue with the teacher” (p. 81), rather than passive recipients of knowledge.

Modes of Inquiry
The participatory action research process of GLA was modified and used for three distinct purposes within the undergraduate course: co-constructing the syllabus, assessing student learning, and soliciting course feedback. This paper discusses two cycles of practitioner action research, including the use of the framework for two semesters.

Data Sources
Data sources included the GLA prompts and responses from each action research cycle, my reflective memoing about how the GLA impacted my experience as instructor, and students’ written reflections.

Results
Students expressed a mix of discomfort and appreciation for the syllabus co-construction process using the GLA. As teacher-researcher, I also experienced this tension in terms of how much structure and content I “should” be providing as teacher. Fassett and Warren (2006) write about similar feelings of discomfort when they invited their students to construct the syllabus for a communication graduate seminar. This finding is an opportunity for further inquiry, as it is reflective of our deeply embedded notions of power in the teacher-student relationship. When used as a tool for assessment and feedback, student reflections indicated that the GLA framework provided a safe structure for open dialogue about the course and students’ reflection on their learning.

Scholarly Significance
This practitioner inquiry project suggests that GLA is a useful model for democratizing the higher education classroom. The adaptation of GLA as a tool for course co-construction and assessment is a unique approach and builds on the scholarship about enacting critical pedagogy. There is great opportunity to continue this line of inquiry through the application of other participatory research methods as pedagogy.

Author

• Annie Straka, University of Cincinnati