Course Micro Certificate: Assessing and Auditing the Collaboration Competency (Intermediate): Assessing and Auditing the Collaboration Competency (Intermediate)

Synopsis
One assignment carries the Collaboration competency. This module shows what that assignment must ask for and why it must produce an individual document, even when the activity is done in groups. It introduces the clause rule, the individual evidence rule and three marking traps that make a Collaboration mark impossible to defend.

Learning outcome
At the end of this module, you will be able to write a four-clause assessment brief that produces individual, non-divisible evidence of Collaboration.

Compare two briefs on the same topic: “Discuss the importance of stakeholder collaboration in water management” and “After the negotiation, state the position you argued against so that its holder would accept it.” Which could a student answer without ever meeting another person?

• Three fixes for individual attribution work: a revision log, a reflective account written to set prompts, or a peer assessment in which the written justification is marked. A bare peer-rating percentage does not work; it measures popularity.
• Weight the Collaboration component at 15 to 25 per cent of the course mark. The group event is not marked for the competency.

A brief that can be answered from lecture notes assesses knowledge about collaboration, not the competency. Write the brief in four clauses, one per criterion, so that every criterion has evidence to mark. Attach an individual submission to every group activity, because a group report is evidence of a group. When marking, avoid the three traps: marking the group, marking sincerity and marking the position. Mark the named input, the named person and the stated change.