It is important to measure the performance of group project but also very important to evaluate the contribution of individual members fairly. The degree of contribution of group members can be assessed by pair-wise comparison method of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. The degree of contribution of group members can be biased in a way that is advantageous to evaluator oneself during the pair-wise comparison process. In this paper, we will examine whether there is a difference in the contribution weight vectors obtained when including evaluator and excluding oneself in the pair-wise comparison. To do this, the experimental data was obtained by making pair-wise comparison in two ways for 15 5-person groups that perform term projects in university classes and 15 pairs of weight vectors for contribution were obtained. The results of the nonparametric test for these 15 pairs of weights vectors are given.

In this study, the PBL class was applied to a Vietnamese video class. 13 learners were divided into 3 groups, and it was examined whether all learners grew toward their learning goals, and if so, through what process they grew. When group 1 announces a task, groups 2 and 3 perform peer evaluation and submit a peer evaluation sheet. For this, group 1 categorized the contents of peer evaluation into reflecting, partially reflecting, revised, and not reflecting to prepare the presentation evaluation sheet. Further, they were required to write a reason why “not reflecting.” A reflection log was also submitted. As a result of the above, the assignments were immediately revised, supplemented, and developed every week through peer and instructor evaluation. Through this process, the instructor learned in detail what kind of reflection the presenter and team members were doing each week. In particular, learners achieved ‘up-leveling’ with the activeness of immediately accepting each other’s strengths while conducting peer evaluations on each other’s presentations. This shows that the weekly assignments are improved, while the competencies of both the presentation team and peers are developed at the same time.

This study investigated the effects of self and peer evaluations and learners’ involvement on the development of assessment criteria in higher education English literature classes. A total of 40 college students participated in the study, extracting five main criteria with 10 sub-standards to assess their group assignments and conduct self- and peer evaluation on their presentations. The results of the learners’ selfand peer assessments were compared with instructor’s assessments and their final grades using one-way ANOVA and correlation analysis. The study also examined the correlation among the assessment criteria to find which factors affected learning outcomes. The study concluded that their participation in the development of assessment criteria positively, affected their critical thinking ability and the selection of subjects for the group presentations. Logicality of writing also affected the outcomes of final assessments. The study concluded that self- and peer assessments can be highly effective in learning processes when learners actively participate in setting the assessment criteria.

The present study investigates the effect of peer evaluation tasks on learners’ noticing and production of prominence. Attention is placed on the students’ noticing episodes during the task, and whether the student utilizes what is noticed into their re-recordings to achieve more intelligible speech. The results reveal that the students directed their attention to the features of prominence, with metalinguistic reflections evident in their transcriptions and exchanges of evaluative comments. The students’ first and second recordings were then assessed by four native speakers based on five criteria: comprehensibility, rhythm, stress, intonation, and perceived naturalness. The ratings indicated that the students’ second recordings were evaluated lower in intelligibility and were regarded as being unnatural, forced, and overly exaggerated in their production of prominence. Lastly, qualitative analyses of the audio revealed that the post-task recordings involved an increased frequency of stress production, but the exaggerated prosodic qualities in pitch, elongation, and volume may have been contributing factors leading to lower intelligibility.