Presentation on theme: "Consistency in assessment feedback to students Julie Hobbs and Sheena Payne."— Presentation transcript:
Consistency in assessment feedback to students Julie Hobbs and Sheena Payne
PROCESS of ASSESSMENT – fundamental principles Assessments are based on the learning outcomes of the module The module proforma identifies how each learning outcome relates to the assessment elements/components The SEEC descriptors chosen are appropriate for the learning outcomes of the module.
The learning outcomes correlate with the module content The learning outcomes reflect the required academic level by the use of appropriate terminology The assessment is designed in a manner that is achievable and fair to the students
PRE-ASSESSMENT INFORMATION ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES The guidelines must provide a detailed explanation of the requirements in order for the students to successfully complete the assessment Management of Caseload; 1000 words You are required to choose and reflect on a situation where you managed a caseload, either in hospital or community, where you have planned, implemented and evaluated the care given to a number of women. The reflection could therefore include issues relating to organisational skills, communication, interprofessional working, dealing with conflict or difficult situations.
The wording of the guidelines should mirror the SEEC descriptors Exemplars may be provided to clarify the requirements
is a can provide not a considers considers encourages Woman centred care Holistic approach Continuity of care Medical Model Physical Psychological and Social needs Individual needs Equal partnership in care
Individualised Identifying care needs Informed choice Provision of unbiased and accurate information Equal partners in care Woman centred care Holistic in nature
INSTRUCTION DURING MODULE DELIVERY The use of an assessment workshop Formative feedback from personal tutor/ module leader Opportunity for formative assessment e.g. OSCE workshop Formative peer assessment e.g. cognitive map group presentation
ENHANCING THE QUALITY OF THE MARKING PROCESS Module team have access to clear marker guidelines, SEEC descriptors, module proforma with learning outcomes, and student assessment guidelines Regular module team meetings to review assessment, assessment guidelines and selection of markers and moderator
A buddying system is in operation to support new members of staff Regular communication with external examiner
MARKING ORGANISATION First and second markers need to ensure they have sufficient time to collaborate and agree allocation of marks, feedback and overall mark awarded Where there is a major discrepancy in the markers opinions, a typed statement is required for the internal moderator/external examiner to clarify how an agreed mark was eventually reached
The module leader has overall responsibility for ensuring that the correct moderation process takes place The moderation report should be clear and comprehensive Note should be taken of external examiner reports and comments
ASSIGNMENT FEEDBACK Evidence that the percentage band for each descriptor corresponds with the written text and the overall agreed mark
Marking Grid for Module No: UZUR9K-20-2 Cognitive map 0 -19 Very poor 20 -29 Poor 30 -39 Inadequate 40 -49 Acceptable 50 -59 Satisfactory 60 -69 Good 70 -79 Very good 80 -89 Excellent 90 -100 Outstanding Knowledge base InsufficientRelevantSubstantialComprehe nsive Extensive Application SynthesisNo synthesisLimitedAdequateNovel solutions Evidence of creativity and imagination Learning resources Communication Presentation Knowledge base Analysis Evaluation Communication
The feedback states clearly whether the module learning outcomes and assessment criteria have been met Provision of sufficient and constructive feedback that clearly identifies how the work could be enhanced for each student regardless of the mark awarded.
Critical Review: Overall this chapter is easy to follow with effective introductory paragraphs to each theme that is addressed. The research grids are very detailed and referred to in the main text. However, more consideration could be given to ethical issues. Apart from this omission, this chapter demonstrates a sound knowledge base of the research process and an ability to competently critique research papers. Furthermore exploration of the topic itself is kept to the forefront.
The feedback commentary incorporates information on both the process undertaken to meet the assessment requirements and the students’ ability to employ the SEEC descriptors
Methodology: In this chapter it does appear that you have chosen the themes from a wider range of literature and you do describe the process undertaken to search the databases and to arrive at the chosen articles. Our main concern, however, is that the themes used for this dissertation i.e. ‘preterm birth’ and ‘low birth weight and infant mortality’ are very narrow areas considering the wider issues associated with teenage pregnancy.
The feedback commentary contains a balance of both the negative and positive aspects of the work Midwives attitudes, teenagers experiences of pregnancy: This review attempts to make some comparisons with the studies critiqued but there needs to be an understanding of the different health professional groups and health care systems involved in order to inform the debate. There is evidence of understanding and analysis of the different research methodology’s used, however a summary of this section would have been useful.
Appropriate terminology is used that values the student effort regardless of the mark awarded
CONCLUSION Assessment feedback cannot be seen in isolation from the whole assessment process Effective communication is essential Assessment feedback should be valued