Large Classes & Assessment Professor Margaret Price Director ASKe Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange) Oxford Brookes University

Outline Context of assessment with large classes Assessment standards and ‘the assessment literate student’ The assessment cycle and interventions Community and density of interactions

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange The Large Class Context  Massification  Resource reduction  Broadening of learning outcomes  Fragmentation  Diversification  Research agendas  Regulation  Quest for reliability

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Assessment: a key driver of student learning “Assessment is at the heart of the student experience” (Brown, S & Knight, P., 1994) “From our students’ point of view, assessment always defines the actual curriculum” (Ramsden, P.,1992) “Assessment defines what students regard as important, how they spend their time and how they come to see themselves as students and then as graduates If you want to change student learning then change the methods of assessment” (Brown, G et al, 1997)

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange But there are problems… Quality reviews National Student Satisfaction Survey (UK) “the Achilles’ heel of quality” (Knight 2002a, p. 107) Summative assessment practices “in disarray” (Knight 2002b, p. 275 “Broken” (Race 2003, p. 5) “There is considerable scope for professional development in the area of assessment” (Yorke et al, 2000, p7) Rising concern about cheating and plagiarism

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Problems contd. “The types of assessment we currently use do not promote conceptual understanding and do not encourage a deep approach to learning………Our means of assessing them seems to do little to encourage them to adopt anything other than a strategic or mechanical approach to their studies.” (Newstead 2002, p3) “…students become more interested in the mark and less interested in the subject over the course of their studies.” (Ibid, p2)

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Working towards assessment literacy Communicating and engaging students with assessment requirements: standards, criteria and feedback  A key issue in assessment is that students often do not understand what is a better piece of work and do not understand what is being asked of them particularly in terms of standards and criteria (O’Donovan et al., 2001).  Understanding assessment criteria and standards is an ‘indispensable condition’ for improved academic performance (Sadler, 1989) and enables assessment for the long term (Boud, 2009) – making informed judgements about one’s own work and that of others which is fundamental to independent learning.

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active student engagement Passive student engagement Informal activities and inputs Formal activities and inputs 1. The Traditional Model – 2. The ‘Dominant Logic’ Explicit Model 3. The Social Constructivist Model 4. The ‘Cultivated’ Community of Practice Model The Past The Future O’Donovan, Price & Rust 2008

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active student engagement Passive student engagement Informal activities and inputs Formal activities and inputs 1. The Traditional Model – Standards absorbed over relatively longer times informally and serendipitously 2. The ‘Dominant Logic’ Explicit Model 3. The Social Constructivist Model 4. The ‘Cultivated’ Community of Practice Model. The Past The Future O’Donovan, Price and Rust. 2008

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active student engagement Passive student engagement Informal activities and inputs Formal activities and inputs 1. The Traditional Model – Standards absorbed over relatively longer times informally and serendipitously 2. The ‘Dominant Logic’ Explicit Model Standards explicitly articulated (with limitations) and passively presented to students 3. The Social Constructivist Model 4. The ‘Cultivated’ Community of Practice Model The Past The Future O’Donovan, Price and Rust. 2008

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Students Active engagement with criteria Rust C.,O’Donovan B. & Price, M. (2005)

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange  Meaningful understanding of standards requires both tacit and explicit knowledge (O’Donovan, B., Price, M., & Rust, C., 2004)  “we can know more than we can tell” (Polanyi, reprinted 1998, p.136).  Verbal level descriptors are inevitably ‘fuzzy’ (Sadler 1987)  There is a cost (in terms of time and resources) to codifying knowledge which increases the more diverse an audience’s experience and language (Snowdon, 2002).  Tacit knowledge is experience-based and can only be revealed through the sharing of experience – socialisation processes involving observation, imitation and practice (Nonaka, 1991)  ‘making sense of the world’ is seen as a social and collaborative activity (Vygotsky, 1978). Making meaning requires explicit and tacit knowledge

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active student engagement Passive student engagement Informal activities and inputs Formal activities and inputs 1. The Traditional Model Standards absorbed over relatively longer times informally and serendipitously 2. The ‘Dominant Logic’ Explicit Model Standards explicitly articulated (with limitations) and passively presented to students 3. The Social Constructivist Model Actively engaging students in formal processes to communicate tacit knowledge of standards 4. The ‘Cultivated’ Community of Practice Model The Past The Future O’Donovan, Price and Rust. 2008

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Students Active engagement with criteria Rust C.,O’Donovan B. & Price M. (2005)

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with criteria Students need to understand the assessment standards and criteria to be able to self-evaluate their work in the act of production itself  Actively engaging students with exemplars (ASKe 123 leaflet)  Peer review and peer assessment  Self-evaluation forms

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Students Active engagement with criteria Rust C.,O’Donovan B. & Price M. (2005)

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Enhancing student learning Feedback is the most powerful single pedagogic influence that makes a difference to student achievement Hattie (1987) - in a comprehensive review of 87 meta-analyses of studies Feedback has extraordinarily high and consistently positive effects on learning compared with other aspects of teaching or other interventions designed to improve learning Black and Wiliam (1998) - in a comprehensive review of formative assessment Students are hungry for feedback to develop their learning (Higgins et al, 2002 ; O’Donovan et al 2001; Hyland 2000)

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active Engagement with Feedback  There is confusion over purpose of feedback  Engagement is strongly influenced by opportunity to apply feedback to future performance This relies on ability to understand feedback expectations of the utility of feedback perception of self efficacy  Feedback is a process not a product. The relational dimension within the process is key to student engagement  Dialogue supports understanding and engagement (Price, Handley,& O’Donovan 2008)

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Enhancing student learning through engagement with feedback  Preparation and setting expectations early in the programme  Identifying ‘feedback moments’ and application opportunities within the programme  Emphasize the relational dimension of feedback  Building in space for dialogue All quite difficult to do in a resource-constrained environment!

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active student engagement Passive student engagement Informal activities and inputs Formal activities and inputs 1. The Traditional Model – Tacit standards absorbed over relatively longer times informally and serendipitously 2. The ‘Dominant Logic’ Explicit Model Standards explicitly articulated (with limitations) and passively presented to students 3. The Social Constructivist Model Actively engaging students in formal processes to communicate tacit knowledge of standards 4. The ‘Cultivated’ Community of Practice Model Tacit standards communicated through participation in informal knowledge exchange networks ‘seeded’ by specific activities. The Past The Future O’Donovan, Price and Rust. 2008

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Students Active engagement with criteria Assessment design & development of explicit criteria Tutor discussion of criteria Marking and moderation Staff Assessment guidance to staff

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Students Active engagement with criteria Assessment design & development of explicit criteria Tutor discussion of criteria Marking and moderation Staff Assessment guidance to staff Rust C.,O’Donovan B & Price., M (2005)

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Cultivating community Student involvement as measured by student/staff and student/student interaction is the most significant predictor of students’ academic success (Astin, 1997)  Cultivating community and increasing density of interactions  ‘affinity space’,  collaborative activity – e.g.group work

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Active engagement with criteria In addition, for group work to be effective, you need to consider…  Product or process?  Group selection, group sizes  Programme policy Students

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Active engagement with criteria In addition, for group work to be effective, you need to consider…  Groupwork and learning outcomes  Groupwork training and practice  Groupwork task - integrated or legoised? Students

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Active engagement with criteria In addition, for group work to be effective, you need to consider…  Early warning systems  Heterogeneous vs. homogeneous groups Students

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Active engagement with feedback Explicit Criteria Completion and submission of work Active engagement with criteria In addition, for group work to be effective, you need to consider…  Individual vs. group marks  Mark allocation method  Student provide feedback Students

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Cultivating community Student involvement as measured by student/staff and student/student interaction is the most significant predictor of students’ academic success (Astin, 1997)  Cultivating community and increasing density of interactions  ‘affinity space’,  collaborative activity – group work  social events

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange Large classes and assessment - economies of scale and improving learning Economies of scale in assessment without pedagogic underpinning threaten learning effectiveness A new model of assessment is needed to support independent learning Dependent on assessment literacy of students and staff