This paper discusses the problem of discriminating between individual contributions in the assessment of group projects. It is argued that peer assessment is a necessary element of any proposed structure but that the use of any 'weighting-factor' system is contrary to the philosophy underpinning collaborative groupwork. A structure that separates the process and product elements of the assessment is described and a set of generic criteria for the process peer assessment identified. This structure was implemented with a group of students at Hong Kong University and evaluated using questionnaires and in-depth interviews. The paper discusses the results of this evaluation and, in particular, identifies the need for 'benchmarking' when using the criteria and also the problematic nature of the 'insider-outsider' syndrome as an important cultural factor.
[Copyright © 2003 Open University of Hong Kong Press.]