Next Article in Journal
Being Different with Dignity: Buddhist Inclusiveness of Homosexuality
Previous Article in Journal
Nonviolence and Religion: Creating a Post-Secular Narrative with Aldo Capitini
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Soc. Sci. 2018, 7(3), 49; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci7030049

The PILAR Model as a Measure of Peer Ratings of Collaboration Viability in Small Groups

1
School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan 2308, Australia
2
School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan 2308, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 20 February 2018 / Revised: 13 March 2018 / Accepted: 13 March 2018 / Published: 20 March 2018
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [303 KB, uploaded 3 May 2018]

Abstract

The PILAR (prospects, involved, liked, agency, respect) model provides a dynamical systems perspective on collaboration. Two studies are performed using peer assessment data, both testing empirical support for the five Pillars that constitute members’ perceptions of collaboration viability (CoVi). The first study analyses peer assessment data collected online from 458 first-year engineering students (404 males; 54 females). A nine-item instrument was inherited from past year’s usage in the course, expanded with four additional items to elaborate upon the agency and liked Pillars. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted on student responses to test whether they thematically aligned to constructs consistent with the five Pillars. As anticipated, twelve of the thirteen items grouped into five components, each aligned with a Pillar, providing empirical evidence that the five Pillars represent perceptions of collaboration. The second study replicated the first study using a retrospective analysis of 87 items included in the Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) peer assessment tool. The associated factor analyses resulted in five components and conceptual alignment of these components with Pillars was evident for three of five CATME components. We recommend a peer assessment instrument based upon PILAR as potentially more parsimonious and reliable than an extensive list of behaviours, such as employed by CATME. We also recommend including items that target inter-rater bias, which is aligned with the liked Pillar, that instruments such as CATME exclude. View Full-Text
Keywords: PILAR; CATME; collaboration; peer assessment; inter-rater bias PILAR; CATME; collaboration; peer assessment; inter-rater bias
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Heslop, B.; Bailey, K.; Paul, J.; Stojanovski, E. The PILAR Model as a Measure of Peer Ratings of Collaboration Viability in Small Groups. Soc. Sci. 2018, 7, 49.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Soc. Sci. EISSN 2076-0760 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top