1. ‘Developing & embedding inclusive assessment across Plymouth University’
Professor Pauline Kneale and Jane Collings

2. Challenging myths and changing approaches to assessment
Difficult territory
Powerful myths
Disciplinary defences
Spaces of resistance
Broadening possibilities
Entering ‘brave’ new spaces
Transformational learning that is equitable.

4. What students say..
Sophie – Biomedical Science What are the explicit and implicit messages in the video clip?

5. Definition from the literature
Inclusive assessment refers to the design and use of fair and effective assessment methods and practices that enable all students to demonstrate to their full potential what they know, understand and can do (Hockings, 2010, p.2)
No just a disability issue
Diverse student population
Illustrations by Chris Glynn

6. Why inclusive assessment ?
Through inclusive design wherever possible, and through individual reasonable adjustments wherever required, assessment tasks provide every student with an equal opportunity to demonstrate their achievement. (QAA.2013 UK Quality Code for Higher Education, Ch B6)
Traditional assessment practices that were once dominated by the unseen examination and the standard essay…have proved unable to capture the range and nature of the diverse learning outcomes now sought from courses.” (Boud & Falchikov 2006)
Work place relevant/authentic
Preparation for the real world
Australia – far advanced in authentic assessment

7. Types of Assessment Diagnostic Assessment (Preparing)
provides an indicator learner’s existing knowledge and capabilities
develop self regulated learner.
identify possible learning support needs .
Formative Assessment (Improving)
provide learners with timely feedback/forward
intended to have an impact on current learning and ultimately to be connected to improved performance
Summative Assessment (Judging)
progression and certification purposes
students often use performances in summative tasks as a proxy measure of learning
Introduce Assessment for Learning
Crisp (2012)

8. An inclusive approach Contingent approach
Waterfield & West (2006) SPACE Project
Plymouth University
Contingent approach
offers provision of special arrangements or adjustments within existing systems
Alternative approach
offers different assessment methods as a bolt-on for a minority of disabled students.
Inclusive approach
is designed to ensure accessibility for all students and reduces the need for MAPs.
This work is not new in SPACE identified the need
MAPs – bust the jargon - no room to put it in full

9. NSS: Assessment and feedback
( % agree )
National Student Survey
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Assessment %
Clear marking criteria 70 71 72 74 76 77
Assessment is fair 73 75 78
Feedback
Feedback is prompt 57 59 62 65 68 69
Provides detailed comments 63 66
Clarifies student queries 58 60 67
Overall student satisfaction 81 83 84 85 86
These NSS figures show the assessment and feedback scores have been really static and difficult to move upwards

10. There is some excellent practice….
Student Comments: Source: UPSU Student Voice Report (2014)
‘Feedback is both comprehensive and constructive whether formative or summative. I now know exactly where I can improve without ever feeling stupid or a failure.’
‘Feedback was so clear and showed me how to develop my work in the future.’
‘Feedback is often sent back within a matter of hours after sending work off for formative marking, meaning students can improve and work on skills needed continuously
Feedback is comprehensive and constructive I now know exactly where I can improve without ever feeling stupid or a failure

11. There is more improvement required ……
Student Open Comments
Source: (NSS 2014)
‘The assessments were vague and unclear leaving me puzzled and confused- I have no idea what makes an A, B or C’.
‘The coursework was outdated, and difficult because it lacked industry relevance’
‘I was unsure of the assignment requirements/criteria despite attending all tutorials and discussions with the module lead’,
‘The disparity in grades and feedback was vast: some being penalised for grammatical, spelling or referencing errors, whilst others were not! ‘
‘We need formative assessment at the beginning so we can improve in summative assessments’
‘I spent 4 months writing my dissertation project and when I got it back there was five lines of feedback, I felt like I’d wasted my time'
‘The coursework guidance was ambiguous’
‘Feedback took over 20 days to return and was unclear how my work could be improved’

12. Assessment for Learning
What are the issues?
What are the cultural implications?
Why now?
What do we need to do ?
Comments onto post it notes
Discussion on tables minutes
Taking key issues in the plenary

13. Developing an inclusive assessment strategy
At Plymouth we conducted a comprehensive consultation on this agenda
Aa a result 15 strategic recommendations went to OVC
Leading to
Inclusive assessment ambition
Assessment Policy 2014

14. Inclusive Assessment why now at Plymouth ?
The increasing diversity of students in UK
An increase in disabled students & associated modified assessment provision costs
Student voice -low scores in NSS for assessment and feedback
NUS & UPSU focus on assessment and feedback
In 2012 a review of PU assessment provision indicated inconsistent practices
An increase in appeals & settlements
A strategic focus on student retention through regular meaningful formative assessment tasks and prompt feedback.
Non traditional entrants- mature students- 3rd year direct entry – international students
Student voice – NUS charter NUS benchmarking tool ( copies on tables )
NSS & SPQ nationally low – at Plymouth we go from excellent to awful
A review of assessment show inconsistency around issues such as academic offences, extenuating circumstances, assessment equivalence, staff having to set 5 different assessments for a one 3 hour exam
Disabled numbers increasing 2012 –12.6 % % %
We spend as much on invigilation of MAPs as all other students
Increase in appeals over assessment - poor questions etc

15. Plymouth University inclusive assessment ambition:
‘all students will have an equitable, supported assessment experience’.
Inclusive assessments will :-
Fairly evaluate students’ ability to meet module and programme learning outcomes and academic standards
Be accessible for all students
Provide every student with an equal opportunity to demonstrate their achievement
Support student engagement, learning, progression, retention and address the needs of our diverse student population
Be authentic and offer students contextualised meaningful tasks that replicate real world challenges through effective programme design.
Reduce the need for modified assessment provision )
Set the scene – SPACE , CEP , NSS SPQ
Review of assessment provision in the university
Assessment for Learning project

16. PU Assessment Policy: 2014
Pre- assessment / feed-in activities & information, discussion, feed-in with clear assessment and marking criteria
Authentic, MAP free/ simple assessment methods aligned to learning outcomes.
Scheduling - throughout the year, normally only 2 summative assignments in 20credit modules.
Access to software for electronic submission and originality checking software.
Fairly marked, anonymously ( if appropriate) with moderation
Feed-forward & feedback with marks (asap) but within 20 days
After consultation with over 200 staff and students and outings at many different forums this policy was developed

17. Resources to assist programme level review of assessment
Staff development through:-
workshops on inclusive assessments and examinations
faculty and school away days,
development of resources both paper and comprehensive website
These tie in with both Inclusive Assessment and changes to the curriculum for CEP

18. Inclusive does not mean ‘easier’ or ‘avoiding things’
Inclusivity can be enhanced through:-
Feed-in
Set up, briefing, preparation,
Practice & rehearse,
assessment & marking criteria
Feed-forward
Formative ‘feedback’, cues, discussion, mid-way reviews, peer & self review/feedback
Feedback
end of task, written, verbal, mp3, YouTube,
marks/grades
Learning
Space
Feed-in/ briefing
Formative assessment
Progressive staging of assessment
(building complexity)
( Magne 2012)

19. Reviewing assessment in a programme
Year:
1/2/3/4/5
MCQ exam
IPSE / OSCE
Case study/ lab report
Essay
Reflective journal
Website/ wiki /podcast
Open book exam
Presentation /viva
Information leaflet
Inclusivity indicator/ risk factors
Skills development
feed-in /preparation
offers progression
feed -forward / feed back
Modified assessment provision
Scheduling bottle- necks
Work placed aligned
Communication skills
Teamwork
Example 
Module 1
Module 2
Module 3
Module 4
Module 5
Module 6
Exercise
Use this gap analysis to review assessment for each year of a programme
Offers risk factors and which modules assess skills development
RAG Rating - Red – Amber – Green (Collings & Magne 2013)

20. NUS Benchmarking assessment and feedback tool 2012
It also offers an excellent example of assessment and marking criteria
Follows the NUS Charter 2010 with the 10 principles of assessment and feedback
New NUS direction on improved feedback

21. Designing and Developing inclusive assessment

22. Improved design Assignments aligned to learning
outcomes & assessment criteria
A range of assessment methods: authentic/work related & few modification implications
Schedule assessments evenly across the year
Offer students detailed pre-assessment activities
Offer progression and opportunities to practice
Design inclusive examinations with 50% max weighting
Well written and clearly structured questions
Consider a choice of assessment methods (maximum of 2)

23. Design inclusive assessment methods
Example of a staff development activity:
Using the assessment methods hand-out on the tables
Methods need to be : -
Reduce the number of complex modified assessments
Authentic and offer real work related challenges
Assessment methods hand-out

24. Traditional Assessment
a) Introduction to Marketing
(Principles, overview & apply concepts)
Current assessment methods
4 x multiple choice question tests - 30% weighting
3 hour unseen exam –70% weighting
b) Introduction to Animal Feed Management
(Principles, & feed management plan)
Current assessment methods
3 short tests % weighting
3 hour unseen exam - 80% weighting
Exercise
To discuss more inclusive and authentic methods of assessment
Discuss weighting inequality of 70:30 and 80:20
Advantaging students who have good memory recall and are good at exams and tests
What are the other assessment method options ?

25. Examples of inclusive practice at Plymouth University
Education: offers a choice of two assessment methods Law: fewer traditional exams, now ‘open book’ & ‘seen’ exams, more formative short answer & MCQ tests. Accounting & Finance : 100% coursework assessment for modules without professional body exemptions and formative assessment opportunities replace tests. History: work-facing assessments Marine Biology: formative assessment via peer review Marketing: no traditional exams, authentic assessments (e.g. group reports, marketing plans and presentations) Navigation & Maritime Science: assessment briefings, revision sessions, 8 hour assignment with a 27 hour time limit, 1.5 hour class tests with the room invigilated for 3 hours.
Education
In some modules students develop the assessment criteria and agree the methods
Law
The professional body the Solicitors regulation authority (SRA) removed unseen exams - Law developed authentic assessment
e.g. assessment brief at 3pm – open book at 10 am – matches workplace practice
Accounting and Finance
Overhaul of all assessment – move towards authentic inclusive assessment unless professional bodies stipulate
History
A more curatorial approach is being taken in a number of assessments
Students have to go to the museum and chose an artefact and then write an essay based on the artefact in a historical context
Marine Biology
Introduction of formative assessment through peer review has raised performance
Marketing
Used to have exams and tests now work place aligned assessments
Navigation and Maritime Science
Comprehensive assessment briefing, 27 hour accident investigation – each student receives a different accident scenario.

26. Impact of inclusive intervention at Plymouth University
Improvements in student satisfaction scores
Assessment
Feedback
Accounting and Finance
+20%
+16%
Business Administration
+36%
+14%
Marketing
+31%
-4%
School of Tourism and Hospitality
+19%
+17%
Physiotherapy
Dental Surgery
+23%
Engineering
+32%
+22%
Marketing - To early for impact on feedback ( As it is in minus )
Lower scores in feedback reflect where has been less intervention and change
National Student Survey: 2014.

27. Challenging myths and changing approaches to assessment
Difficult territory
Powerful myths
Disciplinary defences
Spaces of resistance
Broadening possibilities
Entering ‘brave’ new spaces
Transformational learning that is equitable.

28. References
Boud, D. & Falchikov, N. (2006) Aligning assessment with long term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in HE. vol31.no4.p
Crisp, G. (2012) Integrative assessment: Reframing assessment practice for current and future learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 37, no. 1, pp
Hockings, C. (2010) Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education: a synthesis of research. Higher Education Academy resource.
Mogey, N., Purcell, M., Pateson, J., Burke. J .; ( 2013) Handwriting or typing exams – can we give students the choice?
O’Neill, G. (2011). A Practitioner’s Guide to Choice of Assessment Methods within a Module: Case Studies for University College Dublin. Dublin
QAA: (2013) UK Quality Code for HE. Chapter B6. Assessment of students and recognition of prior learning
Waterfield, J., & West, B.,(2006) Inclusive Assessment in Higher Education: A Resource for Change. Plymouth University

29. Comprehensive staff resource.
All resources on these pages

31. Conducting inclusive exams
Weighting of exams– no more than 50%
Use a range of exam methods (e.g seen, open book, take home etc.)
Signpost support for exam technique sessions
Prepare students for exams -feed-in / feed-forward
Taking the anxiety out of exams through opportunities to practice and rehearse
Ensure students receive feedback after each exam
Offer students the opportunity to type exams and use assistive software ( Mogey 2013)
Discuss weighting inequality of 70:30 and 80:20
Advantaging students who have good memory recall and are good at exams and tests
Link back to the Sophie video clip