Research Article

Quantifying individual contribution in team-based learning: Integrating peer evaluation with learning analytics

Ioannis Katsenos 1 , Spyridon Papadakis 2 , Christos Pierrakeas 1 *
More Detail
1 Department of Management Science and Technology, University of Patras, Patras, GREECE2 Hellenic Open University, Patras, GREECE* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(4), October 2026, ep696, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/19553
Published: 09 October 2026
OPEN ACCESS   115 Views   37 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

We used data from a training program involving a large group of informatics schoolteachers who were trained in the learning activity management system (LAMS) using team-based learning methodology. Extending previous work, we introduced a numerical indicator for the peer evaluations that everyone performed on their peers in their group by introducing the improved project contribution score (IPCS). This way we quantified and summarized the feedback received by individuals within the teams by their colleagues. In parallel, time spent on activities’ sequences in LAMS was used as an objective indicator of learner engagement and its relation to IPCS was examined at different levels. While there was observed only a negligible negative correlation at the total sample level, using generalized linear mixed models and generalized additive mixed models, random forest, and clustering, we identified that team membership and team size were the dominant explanatory factors and showed that cluster-based profiles (high-time/average-IPCS, low-time/high-IPCS, low-time/low-IPCS) exist at deeper level. This could be a useful insight for the trainer as it can serve to identify differentiated support strategies to be applied to team members, especially if applied in a formative way. Finally, the application of peer evaluation and engagement within LAMS-supported group work fills in a sectoral gap, and our article applies patterns reported mainly in university coursework to competency-based, practice-oriented training programs.
Keywords: individual contribution, teamwork, objective evaluation, trainee engagement, lifelong learning

CITATION (APA)

Katsenos, I., Papadakis, S., & Pierrakeas, C. (2026). Quantifying individual contribution in team-based learning: Integrating peer evaluation with learning analytics. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(4), ep696. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/19553

REFERENCES

  1. Achwani, A. S., Rahman, T., & Rusyati, L. (2025). Exploring the relationship between student engagement and academic achievement in science: A study of junior high school students. Journal of Environment and Sustainability Education, 3(3), 323-330. https://doi.org/10.62672/joease.v3i3.116
  2. Adesina, O. O., Adesina, O. A., Adelopo, I., & Afrifa, G. A. (2023). Managing group work: The impact of peer assessment on student engagement. Accounting Education, 32(1), 90-113. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2022.2034023
  3. Ahmadi, G., Mohammadi, A., Asadzandi, S., Shah, M., & Mojtahedzadeh, R. (2023). What are the indicators of student engagement in learning management systems? A systematized review of the literature. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 24(1), 117-136. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v24i1.6453
  4. Alizadeh, M., Masoomi, R., Mafinejad, M. K., Parmelee, D., Khalaf, R. J., & Norouzi, A. (2024). Team-based learning in health professions education: An umbrella review. BMC Medical Education, 24(1), Article 1131. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06147-x
  5. Baker, D. F. (2008). Peer assessment in small groups: A comparison of methods. Journal of Management Education, 32(2), 183-209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562907310489
  6. Bergdahl, N., Bond, M., Sjöberg, J., Dougherty, M., & Oxley, E. (2024). Unpacking student engagement in higher education learning analytics: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), Article 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00493-y
  7. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Wilson, R. W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 891-901. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.891
  8. Cohen, S. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(97)90034-9
  9. Davison, H. K., Mishra, V., Bing, M. N., & Frink, D. D. (2014). How individual performance affects variability of peer evaluations in classroom teams. Journal of Management Education, 38(1), 43-85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562912475286
  10. Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(3), 69-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x
  11. Fellenz, M. R. (2006). Toward fairness in assessing student groupwork: A protocol for peer evaluation of individual contributions. Journal of Management Education, 30, 570-591. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562906286713
  12. Fete, M. G., Haight, R. C., Clapp, P., & McCollum, M. (2017). Peer evaluation instrument development, administration, and assessment in a team-based learning curriculum. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 81(4), Article 68. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe81468
  13. Fleckney, P., Thompson, J., & Vaz-Serra, P. (2025). Designing effective peer assessment processes in higher education: A systematic review. Higher Education Research & Development, 44(2), 386-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2024.2407083
  14. Goh, T.-T. (2025). Learning management system log analytics: The role of persistence and consistency of engagement behaviour on academic success. Journal of Computers in Education, 13, 283-306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-025-00358-x
  15. Gunning, T. K., Conlan, X. A., Collins, P. K., Bellgrove, A., Antlej, K., Cardilini, A. P. A., & Fraser, C. L. (2022). Who engaged in the team-based assessment? Leveraging EdTech for a self and intra-team peer-assessment solution to free-riding. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), Article 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00340-y
  16. Hernández-García, Á., Cuenca-Enrique, C., Del-Río-Carazo, L., & Iglesias-Pradas, S. (2024). Exploring the relationship between LMS interactions and academic performance: A learning cycle approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 155, Article 108183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108183
  17. Hundhausen, C., Conrad, P., Adesope, O., & Tariq, A. (2023). Combining GitHub, chat, and peer evaluation data to assess individual contributions to team software development projects. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 23(3), Article 33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3593592
  18. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED343465
  19. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77-124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x
  20. Katsenos, I., & Pierrakeas, C. (2025). Assessing individual contributions of team members to team achievement by combining peer assessments and digital presence in an academic environment. Education Sciences, 15(3), Article 279. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030279
  21. Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121-1134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121
  22. Mathieu, J. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., van Knippenberg, D., & Ilgen, D. R. (2017). A century of work teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 452-467. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000128
  23. Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Kukenberger, M. R., Donsbach, J. S., & Alliger, G. M. (2015). Team role experience and orientation: A measure and tests of construct validity. Group and Organization Management, 40(1), 6-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601114562000
  24. Nurismawati, R., Rusyati, L., Husna, H. N., & Hidayanti, W. (2025). Exploring the relations between peer assessment, self-assessment, and academic achievement in school science experiment course. Journal of Innovation in Educational and Cultural Research, 6(3), 657-665. https://doi.org/10.46843/jiecr.v6i3.2269
  25. Roberts, C., Jorm, C., Nisbet, G., Gordon, C. J., Chen, T., Held, F., & Haq, I. (2024). Video-based peer assessment of collaborative teamwork in a large-scale interprofessional learning activity. BMC Medical Education, 24(1), Article 1307. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06124-4
  26. Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a “big five” in teamwork? Small Group Research, 36(5), 555-599. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496405277134
  27. Shi, W. W., Jagannadharao, A., Lee, J., & Bailey, B. P. (2021). Challenges and opportunities for data-centric peer evaluation tools for teamwork. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW2), Article 432. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479576
  28. Speckbacher, G., & Wiernsperger, M. (2025). Peer evaluations in diverse teams: How external validation of team performance influences ingroup favoritism. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 114, Article 101595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2025.101595
  29. Stonewall, J., Dorneich, M., Rongerude, J., & Dorius, C. (2018). A review of bias in peer assessment. In Proceedings of the CoNECD 2018 – Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity Conference. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--29510
  30. Sundstrom, E., De Meuse, K. E., & Futrell, D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45(2), 120-133. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.2.120
  31. Sung, Y., Chang, K., Chang, T., & Yu, W. (2010). How many heads are better than one? The reliability and validity of teenagers’ self- and peer assessments. Journal of Adolescence, 33(1), 135-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.04.004
  32. Tasi, P., Scheider, A.-C., & Osipovskaya, E. (2025). Evaluating strategies to increase students’ accountability in entrepreneurship education. In Proceedings of the New Perspectives in Science Education 2025. https://conference.pixel-online.net/library_scheda.php?id_abs=7394&id_crs=3&id_edition=48&id_authors=8150&type=authors
  33. Tong, Y., Schunn, C. D., & Wang, H. (2023). Why increasing the number of raters only helps sometimes: Reliability and validity of peer assessment across tasks of different complexity. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 76, Article 101233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101233
  34. Winter, M., Mordel, J., Mendzheritskaya, J., Biedermann, D., Ciordas-Hertel, G.-P., Hahnel, C., Bengs, D., Wolter, I., Goldhammer, F., Drachsler, H., Artelt, C., & Horz, H. (2024). Behavioral trace data in an online learning environment as indicators of learning engagement in university students. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1396881
  35. Zhang, Y., & Gao, Y. (2024). Exploring the dynamics of student engagement with receiving peer feedback in L2 writing. Assessing Writing, 60, Article 100842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2024.100842