No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Students’ perceptions and experiences of assessment and feedback in three years of a biomedicine degree
Abstract
A student’s experience of assessment has an important determining effect on the way in which they approach learning. This case study examines students’ experience of assessment and feedback in a biomedicine degree programme. A mixed-method approach combined with an assessment audit and an analysis of formative assessment use provided a holistic view of students’ experience of assessment and feedback across years 1–3 of the degree. The Assessment Experience Questionnaire was utilised together with data from open-ended narrative responses to give insight into students’ assessment and feedback experiences. Students (N = 960) reported diverse views about their experiences of assessment across the three years. Third-year students rated their assessment experience significantly lower than did second-year students but not as low as did first-year students. Analysis revealed significant differences in six of eight subdimensions between year 1 and year 3. The trend was downwards, with third-year students reporting lower agreement for the categories of ‘Quantity of effort’, ‘Coverage of syllabus’, ‘Use of feedback’, ‘Appropriate assessment’, ‘Clear goals and standards’ and ‘Overall satisfaction with the course’. An assessment audit revealed a high assessment load and high dependence on exams. Frequent assessment schedules were seen as positive and formative assessments were utilised by most students. A major issue was a lack of clarity concerning goals and standards for assessments. To enable an improvement in the student experience of assessment and feedback, a dialogue about assessment tasks involving good clear communication between teachers, policy makers and students is needed.
... Finally, the achievement reached, a degree work stimulated by an external action such as the constant extrinsic motivation generated by the tutor (Lui & Andrade, 2022;Tay & Lam, 2022) allows not only to produce undiscovered skills and competencies in the young person (Llerena-Izquierdo & Ayala-Carabajo, 2022), but the finished product incorporates a set of expertise acquired by the authors, since in this work contributes with achievable solutions from the professional knowledge of the young researcher, who with impetus, dedication, effort and a lot of illusion contributes with specific results that minimize unfavorable situations in the context of the society in which he/she lives (Black & Wiliam, 2009;Hodgson et al., 2022). ...
Graduating through a research work requires competencies in the student. For this reason, it is essential to study a research tutoring methodology from the tutor's training, resources and strategies that generate a positive, formative, and preventive work environment. The objective of this work focuses on the methodology that a research professor of high scientific productivity with Salesian style generates in the process of university tutoring in research, with visible results in the short term. The results show a total of 84 works completed between 2021 and 2023, an average of 28 works per year, as well as a participation of 29 female students and 59 male students. It is concluded that a research methodology accompanied by professors trained in a friendly spirit, proactive action, and immediate positive results, generates a positive environment where formative and preventive experiences permeate the conscience, the professional profile, and the life plan of the students.
Objectives:
Academic literacy in nursing students has historically been poor this research therefore aimed to investigate the effectiveness of an embedded multidisciplinary approach to academic written communication skills for first year Bachelor of Nursing students in Australia.
Methods:
This initiative consisted of (1) collaboratively embedding academic skills with nursing staff and Learning and Academic Skills Advisors using scaffolded tasks, curriculum/material development, workshops/tutorials on writing skills; and (2) individual support sessions. Data was obtained via questionnaire.
Results:
Responses were received from 92 (74% local and 26% international) students. Key findings showed the collaborative approach to embedding skills with added follow up, was beneficial for students' skills development, including improved academic writing, increased confidence, and recognition of the importance of academic writing.
Conclusions:
It is important to equip student to develop academic literacy and an embedded academic literacy program has been determined to assist and may contribute to future professionalisation in nursing.
The World Health Organization has declared Covid-19 as a pandemic that has posed a contemporary threat to humanity. This pandemic has successfully forced global shutdown of several activities, including educational activities, and this has resulted in tremendous crisis-response migration of universities with online learning serving as the educational platform. The crisis-response migration methods of universities, faculty and students, challenges and opportunities were discussed and it is evident that online learning is different from emergency remote teaching, online learning will be more sustainable while instructional activities will become more hybrid provided the challenges experienced during this pandemic are well explored and transformed to opportunities.
This study examined students’ feedback engagement and assessment experiences in a higher education teacher programme with the Assessment Experience Questionnaire (n = 182) and individual interviews (n = 14). The results suggested that quantity of effort and feedback quality were the most important predictors of variance in students’ use of feedback. Feedback quality was a stronger predictor for female students’ use of feedback compared to male students. Feedback quantity partially mediated the relationship between use of feedback and feedback quality for all students. The interviewed students emphasised that feedback had to be comprehensible, process-oriented, and dialogic to be used. On the contrary, feedback barriers were considered to occur when feedback was negative, incomprehensible, contradictory, or lacked relevance. Maladaptive feedback agency was reported to be exercised by students when teacher-student relationships were affected by mistrust, negativity, or disagreements. The results indicated a summative assessment culture with some formative traits.
This paper is based on the deliberations of the Assessment Working Group at EDUsummIT 2015 in Bangkok,
Thailand. All of the members of Thematic Working Group 5 (TWG5) have contributed to this synthesis of
potentials, concerns and issues with regard to the role of technology in assessment as, for and of learning in the
21
st
century. The group decided to focus primarily on formative assessment rather than summative assessment
and high stakes testing. Formative assessments and feedback provide an important opportunity to support and
enhance student learning. Recognizing shifts in education towards blended and online learning with problembased
and
inquiry-based
approaches
led
to
considerations
of
technologies
that
could
effectively
support
formative
assessment
and
informative
feedback
to
21
st
century learners. The paper concludes with a summary of
conclusions and recommendations of the working group to be taken up in subsequent efforts.
‘Rubric’ is a term with a variety of meanings. As the use of rubrics has increased both in research and practice, the term has come to represent divergent practices. These range from secret scoring sheets held by teachers to holistic student-developed articulations of quality. Rubrics are evaluated, mandated, embraced and resisted based on often imprecise and inconsistent understandings of the term. This paper provides a synthesis of the diversity of rubrics, and a framework for researchers and practitioners to be clearer about what they mean when they say ‘rubric’. Fourteen design elements or decision points are identified that make one rubric different from another. This framework subsumes previous attempts to categorise rubrics, and should provide more precision to rubric discussions and debate, as well as supporting more replicable research and practice.
The aim of this study was to investigate university students’ experiences of open-book, open-web online examinations compared to traditional class examinations concerning preparing, responding, and learning. The data (N = 110) were collected by an online survey from the university students who took an online examination. The students used approximately the same time to study for an online examination as for faculty examination, but over half of them reported using more time for responding and learning more from an online examination compared to a faculty examination. The study supports the earlier findings that assessment methods are essential for students’ learning experiences and that self-efficacy beliefs are essential in positive learning experiences. It also indicates that self-efficacy is affected differently for different students by the online context and that the individual differences in experiencing the learning environment should be taken into account in assessment procedures.
Teachers' conceptions of teaching, including assessment practices, are substantial in directing student learning. Our article refers to assessment at tertiary level biological education. We studied life science (more specifically microbiology-related) teachers' assessment discourse describing how they understood assessment as part of their teaching, how they justified their assessment practices, and how they saw their own as well as the students' role in the assessment processes. We identified three categories of teachers' assessment discourse based on the level of reflection and pedagogical awareness, action and partnership. Within each category, we present characteristic features found in three themes: assessment practices, student learning and purpose of assessment. But awareness of the teachers' different conceptions of assessment is valuable from an educational point of view. We suggest that pedagogical education, peer and institutional support, as well as interaction with the wider higher education community, all play an influential role in the development of assessment practices. Our results indicate that assessment practices at the course level must be carefully considered before changing the focus on assessment for learning instead of assessment of learning.
This research questions the impact of assessment on university teaching and learning in circumstances where all student work is graded. Sixty-two students and lecturers were interviewed to explore their experiences of assessment at an institution that had adopted a modular course structure and largely unregulated numbers of internal assessments. Lecturers rewarded student work with grades and controlled study behaviour with assessment. In some situations it was possible to experience hundreds of graded assessments in an academic year. Students were single-minded when it came to grades and would not work without them. These conditions contributed to competition for student attention and a grading arms race between academics and subjects. In this context, the spaces for achieving certain educational objectives, such as fostering self-motivated learners, were marginalised. Both students and lecturers were unsatisfied with this situation, but neither group could envisage radical change. Students were generally happy to accumulate small marks, while being irritated and stressed by frequent grading. Lecturers were aware of better practices but felt trapped by circumstances. The idea of slow scholarship is introduced to encourage a re-think of such assessment practices, support a positive shift in assessment culture and contribute to the theories of assessment.
Institutional cultures of assessment are praised as beneficial to student learning. Yet, extant studies have not explored the theoretical foundations and pragmatic approaches to shaping cultures of assessment. The researchers used the Delphi method to explore 10 higher education assessment leaders’ attitudes and theoretical perspectives regarding cultures of assessment. These expert assessment leaders were iteratively surveyed until a reasonable threshold of consensus was reached. Study participants viewed buy-in as a necessary component of a positive campus culture of assessment, and advice on reshaping negative cultures was offered. Assessment leaders’ guiding theoretical frameworks were implied and loosely defined with metaphors. Finally, advice is offered for improving cultures of assessment by symbolically connecting assessment to student learning through dialogue.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02602938.2014.917369
Assessment in higher education serves multiple purposes such as providing information about student learning, student progress, teaching quality, and program and institutional accountability. Yet, little is known about faculty and students’ attitudes regarding different aspects of assessment that have wide-ranging implications for policy and practice in tertiary institutions. To investigate these views, parallel surveys of conceptions of assessment were administered to faculty and undergraduate students across four tertiary institutions including universities, an indigenous tertiary institution, and an institute of technology. A mean and covariance structures approach was used to test for measurement invariance and latent means differences between faculty and students regarding their conceptions of assessment. Results revealed differences in the latent means across the two groups. Faculty were likely to view assessment as a trustworthy process aiding teaching and learning, whereas students viewed assessment as focussed primarily on accountability and perceived assessment as irrelevant or even ignored in the teaching and learning process. These findings highlight the importance of ensuring that assessment policy and practices are fit for purposes, and are being carried out with integrity in ways that are transparent to and understood by both staff and students. While these results show how staff and students view assessment practices, one should keep in mind that while the sample was large and did incorporate different types of tertiary institutions, the inclusion of a broader range of disciplines would make the conclusions more generalizable.
Assessment in higher education is commonly held to contribute to feedback to students on their learning and the certification of their achievement. This paper argues that this short‐term focus must be balanced against a longer‐term emphasis for learning‐oriented assessment to foster future learning after graduation. The paper proposes that students need to become assessors within the context of participation in practice, that is, the kinds of highly contextualised learning faced in life and work. It discusses the kinds of practices that are needed to refocus assessment within higher education courses to this end.
This paper critically reviews the empirical research on the use of rubrics at the post‐secondary level, identifies gaps in the literature and proposes areas in need of research. Studies of rubrics in higher education have been undertaken in a wide range of disciplines and for multiple purposes, including increasing student achievement, improving instruction and evaluating programmes. While, student perceptions of rubrics are generally positive and some authors report positive responses to rubric use by instructors, others noted a tendency for instructors to resist using them. Two studies suggested that rubric use was associated with improved academic performance, while one did not. The potential of rubrics to identify the need for improvements in courses and programmes has been demonstrated. Studies of the validity of rubrics have shown that clarity and appropriateness of language is a central concern. Studies of rater reliability tend to show that rubrics can lead to a relatively common interpretation of student performance. Suggestions for future research include the use of more rigorous research methods, more attention to validity and reliability, a closer focus on learning and research on rubric use in diverse educational contexts.
Teaching as a system Teaching and learning take place in a whole system, which embraces classroom, departmental and institutional levels. A 'poor' system is one in which the components are not integrated, and are not tuned to support high-level learning. In such a system, only the 'academic' students use higher-order learning processes. In a 'good' system, all aspects of teaching and assessment are tuned to support high-level learning, so that all students are encouraged to use higher-order learning processes. Constructive alignment (CA) is such a system. It is an approach to curriculum design that optimizes the conditions for quality learning. For an example of a poor system, here is what a psychology undergraduate said about his teaching: I hate to say it, but what you have got to do is to have a list of 'facts'; you write down ten important points and memorize those, then you'll do all right in the test ... If you can give a bit of factual information – so and so did that, and concluded that – for two sides of writing, then you'll get a good mark. Quoted in Ramsden (1984: 144) The problem here is not the student. In fact, this student liked writing extended essays, and finally graduated with First Class Honours, but he was contemptuous of these quick and snappy assessments. So in psychology, he made a strategic decision to memorize, knowing that it was enough to get him through, saving his big guns for his major subject. The problem here is the assessment: it was not aligned to the aims of teaching. So often the rhetoric in courses and programmes is all that it should be, stating for example that students will graduate with a deep understanding of the discipline, and the ability to solve problems creatively. Then they are told about creative problem solving in packed lecture halls, and tested with multiple-choice tests. It's all out of kilter, but such a situation is not, I strongly suspect, all that uncommon.
In recent years universities have attempted to articulate the generic outcomes of the educational experiences they provide, beyond the content knowledge that is taught. These outcomes have come to be known as generic skills or generic graduate attributes in Australia, although they are also referred to by a range of other terms. Akin to some aspects of a mission statement, universities have claimed that these are the core outcomes of higher education and that every graduate of every degree will possess these. A recent phenomenographic investigation into academics' conceptions of these generic attributes revealed that, far from a shared understanding of such attributes as core outcomes, academics hold a variety of disparate understandings of the nature of generic attributes and their place amongst the outcomes of a university education. This variation is described in the Conceptions of Generic Attributes model. The present article extends this model by considering the way academics understand the teaching and learning of such attributes. The various pedagogical intentions and understandings identified in the present analysis are related to the conceptions of graduate attribute outcomes reported in the earlier study. The relationships between these two aspects of academics' understandings of generic attributes (what it is that is taught/learnt and how it is taught/learnt) are seen to be internally consistent. The conceptions identified in this analysis provide a way of making sense of the range of curricula approaches reported in the literature. Moreover, these integrated conceptions of generic graduate attributes provide a tool to support current attempts to implement systematic curriculum reform in universities.
Various forms of peer, collaborative or cooperative learning, particularly small group activities, are increasingly used within university courses to assist students meet a variety of learning outcomes. These include working collaboratively with others, taking responsibility for their own learning and deepening their understanding of specific course content. The potential benefits of peer learning have long been recognised and are especially relevant today. However, many existing assessment practices act to undermine the goals of peer learning and lead students to reject learning cooperatively. If assessment gives students the message that only individual achievement is valued, and that collaborative effort is akin to cheating, then the potential of peer learning will not be realised. Inappropriate assessment practices may also lead to unhelpful forms of competition within and between groups that prevent groups functioning effectively. This paper examines some of the main assessment issues in connection with peer learning and suggests ways in which the benefits of this approach can be maintained while still meeting the formal assessment requirements of the course. It discusses the use of group assessment, peer feedback and self‐assessment, assessment of participation and negotiated assessment and concludes with the identification of a number of issues which remain to be addressed.
The requirement to provide timely formative tasks that are designed to facilitate student learning and autonomy has provoked a wider examination of the role of assessment in higher education and encouraged further investigation of the alignment of learning, teaching and assessment in curriculum design frameworks. Many current authors have proposed that the primary purpose of assessment is to enhance current and future learning and that current practice tends to overemphasise the importance of assessment for progression and certification purposes. This paper proposes that a clearer distinction be made between assessment tasks designed to facilitate and test current learning through the use of formative and summative assessments, and those tasks primarily designed to enhance future learning, which could be better termed integrative assessments. This distinction would allow students and teachers to have greater clarity around the proposed outcomes and reward mechanisms associated with assessment tasks and feedback. This paper proposes that teachers should strive to incorporate four different types of assessment tasks throughout a programme of study, namely diagnostic, formative, integrative and summative tasks, and that the outcomes and reward mechanisms for different assessment types be explained more clearly to students.
This article reports the findings of research into the student experience of assessment in school/college and higher education, and the impact of transition upon student perceptions of feedback quality. It involved a qualitative study of 23 staff and 145 students in six schools/colleges and three English universities across three disciplines. Results show that students experience a radically different culture of feedback in schools/colleges and higher education, with the former providing extensive formative feedback and guidance, while the latter focuses upon independent learning judged summatively. Students perceived quality feedback as part of a dialogic guidance process rather than a summative event. A model is proposed, the Dialogic Feedback Cycle, to describe student experiences at school/college, and suggestions are made as to how it can be used as a tool to scaffold the development of independent learning throughout the first year of university study.
The research on formative assessment and feedback is reinterpreted to show how these processes can help students take control of their own learning, i.e. become self-regulated learners. This refor-mulation is used to identify seven principles of good feedback practice that support self-regulation. A key argument is that students are already assessing their own work and generating their own feedback, and that higher education should build on this ability. The research underpinning each feedback principle is presented, and some examples of easy-to-implement feedback strategies are briefly described. This shift in focus, whereby students are seen as having a proactive rather than a reactive role in generating and using feedback, has profound implications for the way in which teachers organise assessments and support learning.
In educational contexts, understanding the student's learning must take account of the student's construction of reality. Reality as experienced by the student has an important additional value. This assumption also applies to a student's perception of evaluation and assessment. Students' study behaviour is not only determined by the examination or assessment modes that are used. Students' perceptions about evaluation methods also play a significant role. This review aims to examine eval-uation and assessment from the student's point of view. Research findings reveal that students' perceptions about assessment significantly influence their approaches to learning and studying. Conversely, students' approaches to study influence the ways in which they perceive evaluation and assessment. Findings suggest that students hold strong views about different assessment and evalu-ation formats. In this respect students favour multiple-choice format exams to essay type questions. However, when compared with more innovative assessment methods, students call the 'fairness' of these well-known evaluation modes into question.
Previous research on student learning has established the importance of the constrasting conceptions of learning held by students, and of the distinction between deep and surface approaches to learning. It has also shown that the outcome of learning may be described in terms of qualitatively different levels and that different forms of examination encourage different levels of answer. Within all these studies the nature of the understanding which is developed has been rather taken for granted. In this essentially exploratory study, a detailed examination of the interview transcripts of 13 students, who had just completed their final degree, was supplemented by analyses of written responses from an additional 11 students in their final undergraduate year. In the interviews, the students were asked about the revision strategies they had adopted and their attempts to develop understanding, and aspects of these were explored further through the written responses. Analyses of both interviews and written responses indicated the existence of differing forms of understanding which parallel, to some extent, the conceptions of learning identified previously. Links were also explored between the revision strategies adopted and the forms of understanding reached. Implications of the findings suggest that traditional degree examinations do not consistently test deep, conceptual understanding. It appears that some students gear their revision to question types which can be answered within frameworks provided by the lecturer or a textbook and that the type of questions set has a strong influence on the forms of understanding students seek during their studying and their revision. Some types of question encourage, and test, a restricted form of conceptual understanding. It also seems that the particular types of structure used in a lecture course to provide a framework also has an important influence on the ease with which students can relate it to other courses and also develop their own understanding.
Transitioning from high-school to university can be difficult, and many university teachers feel students are often ill-prepared for the change. To investigate this 233 Humanities and Science students at the University of Adelaide were surveyed 6 months into their first year regarding experiences of teaching and learning at university. 189 students were also surveyed 18 months after commencement, to gain retrospective views of their transition year, as were lecturers and tutors of both groups. Results were compared to similar Orientation Week questionnaires that focused on expectations. Questions included reasons for selecting degrees, quality of teacher feedback and perceived impact of outside commitments. Even though student expectations, student experience, and teacher views differed, remarkable similarities emerged across the two degree programs (Science and Humanities). Our findings thus highlight a call for non-specialised transition programs to meet the needs of first year students and facilitate the transition from secondary to tertiary education.
Two experiments examined the testing effect with open-book tests, in which students view notes and textbooks while taking the test, and closed-book tests, in which students take the test without viewing notes or textbooks. Subjects studied prose passages and then restudied or took an open- or closed-book test. Taking either kind of test, with feedback, enhanced long-term retention relative to conditions in which subjects restudied material or took a test without feedback. Open-book testing led to better initial performance than closed-book testing, but this benefit did not persist and both types of testing produced equivalent retention on a delayed test. Subjects predicted they would recall more after repeated studying, even though testing enhanced long-term retention more than restudying. These experiments demonstrate that the testing effect occurs with both open- and closed-book tests, and that subjects fail to predict the effectiveness of testing relative to studying in enhancing later recall.
This paper reviews the corpus of research on feedback, with a particular focus on formative feedback—defined as information communicated to the learner that is intended to modify the learner's thinking or behavior for the purpose of improving learning. According to researchers in the area, formative feedback should be multidimensional, nonevaluative, supportive, timely, specific, credible, infrequent, and genuine (e.g., Brophy, 1981; Schwartz & White, 2000). Formative feedback is usually presented as information to a learner in response to some action on the learner's part. It comes in a variety of types (e.g., verification of response accuracy, explanation of the correct answer, hints, worked examples) and can be administered at various times during the learning process (e.g., immediately following an answer, after some period of time has elapsed). Finally, there are a number of variables that have been shown to interact with formative feedback's success at promoting learning (e.g., individual characteristics of the learner and aspects of the task). All of these issues will be discussed in this paper. This review concludes with a set of guidelines for generating formative feedback.
The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.
In assessment a considerable shift in thinking has occurred from assessment of learning to assessment for learning. This has important implications for the conceptual framework from which to approach the issue of assessment, but also with respect to the research agenda. The main conceptual changes pertain to programmes of assessment. This has led to a broadened perspective on the types of construct assessment tries to capture, the way information from various sources is collected and collated, the role of human judgement and the variety of psychometric methods to determine the quality of the assessment. Research into the quality of assessment programmes, how assessment influences learning and teaching, new psychometric models and the role of human judgement is much needed.
Assessment in higher education requires a high level of accountability and responsibility and is a major influence on student learning but can be a source of stress for staff and students. This project aimed to evaluate first-year students’ conceptions of assessment in biomedical science and nursing to determine positive or negative trends and how these can be facilitated or mitigated. This mixed-methods study compared the conceptions of assessment between students in nursing and biomedical science students at one university, using the Conceptions of Assessment questionnaire. The results revealed that overall students in the two different areas of study had similar perceptions of assessment. Students were found to have positive conceptions of assessment which were identified as relating to their secondary education. Thematic analysis of students’ responses identified eight themes associated with their perception of what assessment is, and the associated limitations of assessment and the multi-faceted personal factors that affected students’ position towards assessment. This study recommends a shift in focus from assessment relating to accountability, towards assessment for learning to maintain students’ initial perceptions of assessment to ensure their experience aligns with their expectations. Transparent communication about assessment requirements and support for students to undertake assessment may mitigate students’ negative perceptions held towards assessment.
The measurement of learning engagement is a major research theme, both in the learning analytics community and the broader area of educational research. The complexity of conceptualizing as well as operationalizing the construct of engagement generates a wide range of instruments, such as self-report surveys, log data from technology-enhanced learning systems, think-aloud, and tests. In this empirical work, we investigate the alignment of behavioural traces of engagement with self-report measures and their impact on academic performance. The unique contribution of this study is the integration of temporal, behavioural, affective, and cognitive dimensions of engagement by combining digital traces at three different learning phases with self-report, formative as well as summative assessments. Using a two-step cluster analysis based on data from 1027 undergraduate students in a first-year 8-week statistics course, we identified four distinct temporal engagement patterns (i.e. nonactive, active before tutorial, active before quiz, and active before exams). Our analysis showed that early engagement (i.e. before tutorial) was significantly associated with course performance and self-report measures, while late engagement patterns had weaker correlations. This study shed further lights on a potential source of heterogeneity and collinearity in engagement measures (i.e. timing of engagement) that should be accounted for in learning analytics model. In order to design effective intervention, it is crucial to consider different profiles of learners based on their engagement patterns as well as the temporal relation between trace data, self-report, and academic performance.
Higher education assessment policies aim to please all, creating confusion for staff and students. This study reports on staff and student conceptions of assessment and the students’ experience of the assessment regime over their Biomedical Science degree. There was a general alignment of staff and students views of assessment for 19 of 27 items on the ‘Conceptions of Assessment’ questionnaire (CoA). Areas of discrepancy were identified in: (i) the use of assessment as institutional quality, students identified this as more important than staff, and (ii) assessment is used for modifying teaching practices, students did not recognise this as an important role. Students experience of the assessment regime over their degree revealed : (i) the excessive quantity of assessment without a clear delineation between formative and summative assessment, (ii) the importance of exams in learning, (iii) dissatisfaction with feedback timing, quality and quantity and (iv) self-reported high use of feedback received. This retrospective study highlights the need for an assessment dialogue between staff and students to reduce student mistrust over assessment and to improve staff–student relationships. Identifying the gap in assessment conceptions may assist staff in understanding student’s behaviour towards their grades, feed- back and the competitive student environment.
The Assessment Experience Questionnaire has been widely used to measure conditions of learning from assessment. It is one of three methods used in the ‘Transforming the Experience of Students through Assessment’ research process, originally funded by the Higher Education Academy to explore programme assessment patterns, and now used extensively in universities in the United Kingdom. Given the growth of assessment and feedback research over the last decade, the Assessment Experience Questionnaire is ripe for revision. Critics have queried its theoretical and statistical robustness. This study investigated the psychometric properties of the Assessment Experience Questionnaire, as the first step in the process of strengthening the instrument. Specifically, we examined the validity of the questionnaire with a sample of final year undergraduate students from eight UK universities (n = 633). Results were mixed, confirming that the questionnaire has some value, but indicating that not all sub-scales possess adequate psychometric properties to underpin confident conclusions. As a result, we have embarked on a process of making conceptual modifications to the Assessment Experience Questionnaire, both to update the theoretical constructs, and to ensure stronger overall validity.
In spite of the rising tide of metrics in UK higher education, there has been scant attention paid to assessment loads, when evidence demonstrates that heavy demands lead to surface learning. Our study seeks to redress the situation by defining assessment loads and comparing them across research and teaching intensive universities. We clarify the concept of ‘assessment load’ in response to findings about high volumes of summative assessment on modular degrees. We define assessment load across whole undergraduate degrees, according to four measures: the volume of summative assessment; volume of formative assessment; proportion of examinations to coursework; number of different varieties of assessment. All four factors contribute to the weight of an assessment load, and influence students’ approaches to learning. Our research compares programme assessment data from 73 programmes in 14 UK universities, across two institutional categories. Research-intensives have higher summative assessment loads and a greater proportion of examinations; teaching-intensives have higher varieties of assessment. Formative assessment does not differ significantly across both university groups. These findings pose particular challenges for students in different parts of the sector. Our study questions the wisdom that ‘more’ is always better, proposing that lighter assessment loads may make room for ‘slow’ and deep learning.
Portfolios are embraced extensively in higher professional education as effective tools for students to represent their learning and help prepare them for future practice. They are very diverse, used for both formative and summative purposes; however, concerns are raised that the current emphasis on academic standards and/or the focus on employability may lead to the perception of portfolios simply as means to portray achievements. This paper argues that contemporary portfolios in digital environments can readily facilitate both purposes. It conceptualises a whole-of-programme approach to the use of portfolios in which consideration is given to the need to bring curation skills and feedback processes to the forefront of portfolio practices. For teachers considering these issues, a planning framework for the design of programme-wide portfolios is proposed.
The purpose of this chapter is to explain the rationale for employing TwoStep cluster analysis as a market segmentation method within social marketing. Here, the key stages to be performed and the validation techniques required for effective application of this clustering technique are outlined. To further support the application of this cluster analysis technique as a profiling tool, a review of 25 recent market segmentation studies that have utilised this method is provided. Finally, a case study is provided to demonstrate how TwoStep cluster analysis is employed to segment respondents for an active school travel social marketing campaign that was being developed in Queensland at time of writing. Based on a sample of 537 respondents, three segments were identified and validated, each of which differed significantly based on psychographic, behaviour, geographic and demographic variables. Limitations of the TwoStep Cluster Analysis method are also provided, and opportunities for future research employing TwoStep cluster analysis within a social marketing context conclude this chapter.
The development of students as lifelong, self-regulating learners is a valued outcome of higher education. To this end, the current project investigated how students in an undergraduate course experienced and responded to a teaching?learning environment where they were expected to take responsibility for their learning. The pedagogic environment of this course was grounded in strategies and activities associated with assessment for learning (AfL). As such, students were expected to participate in activities that provided them with opportunities to exercise control over their learning. Data gathering comprised individual semi-structured interviews and the collection of artefacts. Findings indicated goals helped students know where they were going; exemplars provided insights into what was expected and what constituted quality work; course activities elicited evidence of learning; dialogic interactions around these generated feedback about understandings and progress; the evaluation of exemplars developed evaluative knowledge, skill and expertise; peer review and feedback provided an authentic context for evaluation and monitoring of works-in-progress. It was concluded that, while each of the AfL strategies contributed to student self-regulation, the full impact of AfL as a catalyst for self-regulated learning was realised in the cumulative and recursive effect these strategies had on students? thinking, actions and feelings.
Regardless of the institution or discipline, the UK's National Student Survey (NSS) has consistently highlighted that the level of student satisfaction about the feedback they receive is notably lower than for other aspects of their learning experience. This study explored how students understand concepts and practices rated through NSS questions evaluating feedback practices in higher education. Drawing on questionnaires completed by first, third and fourth year Chemical Engineering students, the study calls into particular question the reliability of NSS data on promptness of feedback. In conclusion, it calls for greater attention to be paid at institutional level to the identification and management of students' perceptions and expectations of the process, content and outcomes of feedback.
In the UK and other countries, the use of end-of-module assessment by coursework in higher education has increased over the last 40 years. This has been justified by various pedagogical arguments. In addition, students themselves prefer to be assessed either by coursework alone or by a mixture of coursework and examinations than by examinations alone. Assessment by coursework alone or by a mixture of coursework and examinations tends to yield higher marks than assessment by examinations alone. The increased adoption of assessment by coursework has contributed to an increase over time in the marks on individual modules and in the proportion of good degrees across entire programmes. Assessment by coursework appears to attenuate the negative effect of class size on student attainment. The difference between coursework marks and examination marks tends to be greater in some disciplines than others, but it appears to be similar in men and women and in students from different ethnic groups. Collusion, plagiarism and personation (especially ‘contract cheating’ through the use of bespoke essays) are potential problems with coursework assessment. Nevertheless, the increased use of assessment by coursework has generally been seen as uncontentious, with only isolated voices expressing concerns regarding possible risks to academic standards.
It is perhaps axiomatic to assert that assessment is fundamental to student learning and achievement. However, whilst research consistently emphasises the role of assessment in supporting the development of the learner, the reality of assessment processes and practices in higher education is frequently indicated to fall someway short. This article aims to contribute to a shared understanding of the discourse surrounding assessment in UK higher education and presents a synopsis of the role of assessment in curriculum change. Key drivers for change, the inhibitory role of the dominant discourse of assessment, and suggestions for future development towards an assessment for learning culture, are considered as a means of giving greater prioritisation to assessment than is currently afforded.
Many performance indicators in Australian higher education are based on the quantitative data from student feedback surveys, while the qualitative data usually generated by these surveys receive relatively limited attention. This paper argues that these data, if collected and analysed in a systematic way, can be used as an effective and robust institutional performance indicator and can assist in the enhancement of the student experience. The paper describes a comparative analysis of qualitative data generated at a large metropolitan multi-campus university by the annual Course Experience Questionnaire during 2001–2011. In total, approximately 78,800 student open-ended comments have been analysed via CEQuery – a software tool that facilitates analysis of the written comments. The results compared across the years allow the university to identify key trends in student experience and areas that warrant an improvement focus. The paper provides examples on how the university uses the data. It concludes that to be successful, universities should include a focus on what students have to say in their own words and incorporate such feedback into their priorities.
It is widely accepted across Higher Education that assessment practices have a link with learning and a key factor in this link is formative assessment. Formative assessment is generally defined as taking place during a module/programme with the express purpose of improving and enhancing student learning. It is important to understand how lecturers in construction engineering education perceive their own roles and the roles of their students in using effective assessment strategies. An investigation into lecturers’ perceptions of their roles and their conceptions related to the assessment process of students in those programmes is reported. An on-line survey was conducted with over 30 Irish academics involved in the area of construction management. Discussion is focused on a critical evaluation of the findings of the study and how it relates to the current literature on the roles of academics in the formative assessment process. Recommendations are made on how lecturers/teachers might better formulate appropriate assessment strategies that will encourage deep and effective learning.
Audits of 23 degree programmes in eight universities showed wide variations in assessment patterns and feedback. Scores from Assessment Experience Questionnaire returns revealed consistent relationships between characteristics of assessment and student learning responses, including a strong relationship between quantity and quality of feedback and a clear sense of goals and standards, and between both these scales and students’ overall satisfaction. Focus group data helped to explain students’ learning responses but also identified ambivalent responses to the use of formative-only assessment, particularly when it was optional. Frequently, students were unclear about goals and standards, and found feedback unhelpful when assessment demands differed across modules, and when marking standards and approaches varied widely, making it difficult for feedback to feed forwards. The methodology underpinning the Transforming the Experience of Students through Assessment study described here has been used in more than 20 universities worldwide and is helping teachers to redesign assessment regimes, so that teachers’ efforts support learning better.
The impact of innovative assessment on student experience in higher education is a neglected research topic. This represents an important gap in the literature given debate around the marketisation of higher education, international focus on student satisfaction measurement tools and political calls to put students at the heart of higher education in the UK. This paper reports on qualitative findings from a research project examining the impact of assessment preferences and familiarity on student attainment and experience. It argues that innovation is defined by the student, shaped by diverse assessment experiences and preferences, and therefore its impact is difficult to predict. It proposes that future innovations must explore assessment choice mechanisms which allow students to shape their own assessments. Cultural change and staff development will be required to achieve this. To be accepted, assessment for student experience must be viewed as a complementary layer within a complex multi-perspective model of assessment, which also embraces assessment of learning, assessment for learning and assessment for lifelong learning. Further research is required to build a meta-theory of assessment to enhance the synergies between these alternative approaches and minimise the tensions between them.
This article discusses issues relating to the effectiveness of feedback and the student perspective. The study described provides rich data relating to student perceptions of useful feedback, their perceptions of feedback cues and their feelings about the importance of feedback relationships in the process. The outcomes suggest that written feedback is often not the most effective tool for helping students to improve their learning. The students in this study had much broader perceptions of useful feedback. Their perceptions challenge some of the assumptions that might be seen to underpin auditing approaches to monitoring the quality of feedback such as that of the National Student Survey.
Dental students in third (n = 35) and fifth years (n = 50) at Adelaide and Trinity College Dental Schools were surveyed about their experiences of assessment and their perceptions of the importance of particular aspects of assessment. Students reported on their assessment experience within their programmes by describing a critical assessment incident and their response to it, and also rated assessment purposes and features using a 5‐point Likert scale of relative importance. The students described a range of assessment methods, including group assignments, vivas, laboratory assessment, and problem‐based learning tutorials, but written examinations/tests and clinical assessment were discussed most frequently. Negative assessment experiences were commonly noted. The two most frequently raised issues were lack of congruence between student and staff perceptions of performance, and not receiving adequate feedback. There were no significant differences between years or schools in students’ ratings of the importance of assessment purposes. Overall, the students rated the provision of feedback on learning and motivation for learning as the most important purposes (> 80%). Patient‐based scenarios were rated as the most important method for judging students’ learning (> 90%), whilst group‐work tasks were rated of little importance. Overall, students rated clear requirements and feedback as the most important characteristics for positive assessment outcomes. Students’ ratings of assessment purposes, characteristics and methods closely matched the features of good assessment practice found in the literature. However, their assessment experiences indicate the need for review of assessment in both schools, particularly related to student–staff expectations of performance levels, and the provision of feedback.
Many reports have identified a perceived lack of quality in regard to assessment feedback in higher education contexts. One research study in 2007 on undergraduate university students found that less than half of the students (46%) collected their formative feedback, suggesting that from their perspective feedback clearly was not fulfilling the role it should. This is a study of 465 graduate students and 101 undergraduate students studying teacher education at a major Australian university. The study investigated what students perceived to be effective, quality feedback based upon their extensive higher education experiences. Students identified preferences in regard to form, detail and timing of assessment feedback. The data were collected by means of pen and paper survey and identified which strategies the students perceived to be the most effective, particularly within the context of large cohort teaching and written assessment formats. Findings agreed with research elsewhere regarding problems with assessment feedback quality and quantity, but students also provided clear indications of how realistic improvements could be made in terms of assessment feedback processes and strategies.
This study measured the learning preference profile development and readiness for self-directed learning over time of two undergraduate student cohorts experiencing different curricular presentations of essentially the same syllabus. The results from three measurement points are reported following each cohort through their first half of the BSc (Honours) Physiotherapy Course, Cardiff. At intake both cohorts preferred a concrete, fact-based learning environment, which was teacher structured. Over time, the cohorts responded significantly differently to their curricula in respect of the student-structured learning preference (LP) variable (p < 0.05), and displayed trends (p < 0.1) towards response difference for the concrete, interpersonal and individual LP variables. Cohort differences are discussed in terms of the planned curriculum changes made during the intervening revalidation exercise. It is suggested that curricula mould students' learning profile development. The impact of this statement on future curriculum development is discussed and educational research-in-action promoted.
Reforming Educational Assessment: Imperatives, Principlpes and Challenges.” I . Australian Council for Educational Research
- G Masters
Measuring the Response of Students to Assessment: The Assessment Experience Questionnaire.” 11th Improving Student Learning Symposium
- G Gibbs
- C Simpson
A Critical Review of Research on Formative Assessments: The Limited Scientific Evidence of the Impact of Formative Assessments in Education
- K E Dunn
- S W Mulvenon
Assessment in Higher Education: Issues of Access, Quality, Student Development and Public Policy. England: Routledge
- S J Messick