Assessment: generic issues Chris Shiel, Head of Learning and Teaching, IBAL 2 nd Project Management Conference for Excellence in Teaching Learning and Assessment September 2005

Presentation outline  My thoughts  Influence and purpose of assessment  Highlights from the literature  Some thoughts for PM  Final comments

Initial thoughts  Assessment is not an exact science  Summative assessment in ‘disarray’ (Knight & Mantz Yorke 2003)  The trust we put on grades is not shared by experts in assessment  Too much emphasis on summative  What are we assessing process or output?

Learning and Assessment  ‘From our students’ point of view, assessment always defines the actual curriculum’ (Ramsden 1992)  ‘Assessment defines what students regard as important, how they spend their time and how they come to see themselves as graduates…. If you want to change student learning then change the methods of assessment’ (Brown, G et al 1997)  Students are increasingly instrumental!

The influence and purpose of assessment  Assessment is a major influence on: What students learn How we teach How students organise their studies (Race 1994)  Why do we do it? 3 purposes of assessment: licence to proceed or graduate Classify/rank performance Improve learning (Brown)

What does the literature suggest we should be concerned with? (Rust 2005)  Constructive alignment  Principles of good practice  Deep and surface approaches  Maximising potential  Assessment and feedback  Social constructivist approaches

Constructive alignment - what is it?  Assessment needs to be an integral part of course design (not bolted on) (Race 1994)  ‘The fundamental principle of constructive alignment is that a good teaching system aligns teaching method and assessment to the learning activities stated in the objectives so that all aspect of the system are in accord and supporting student learning’ (Biggs 1999)

Essence of constructive alignment Biggs 1999  Establish and articulate desired outcomes (ILOs)  Determine teaching methods needed to get students to behave in ways that are likely to achieve the ILOs  Determine which assessment tasks will tell us if the actual outcomes match the ILOs

Importance of consistency (Rust 2005)  By the end of this unit students will be able to use and evaluate project management software (pms) to manage a project  Teaching will focus on the use and evaluation of pms  Assessment: will test how well the student can use and evaluate pms to manage a project

7 principles of good practice  Encourage student-staff contact  Encourage cooperation amongst students  Encourage active learning  Give prompt feedback  Emphasise time on task  Communicate high expectations  Respect diverse talents and ways of learning Arthur W Chickering et al, for the American Association of HE, the Education Commission of the States, and the Johnson Foundation

Deep and surface approaches to learning  Surface Approach: student reduces learning to facts that can be regurgitated later  Deep Approach: student tries to make sense of what is learnt, explores ideas and concepts and is able to integrate learning with other/wider ideas, concepts and tasks

What encourages a surface approach? (Rust 2005)  High workload  High class contact  Too much course material  Lack of opportunity to explore topics in depth  Lack of choice over subjects/method  Threatening and anxiety provoking assessment system  Lecturer provides all the information and all the answers (Shiel)

Encouraging a deep approach  Engender intrinsic motivation  Learner activity ( learn by doing/testing)  Opportunity to interact with others  Well structured knowledge base – chunking and integration  Enable opportunity to develop through SOLO Taxonomy

SOLO Taxonomy Extended abstract - beyond principles theorise, hypothesise, reflect Relational - uses, integrates, applies Compare, contrast, explain, analyse Multistructural - knowledge telling Enumerate, describe, list Unistructural - simple naming Identify, recognise, memorise After Biggs 2003

Maximising potential (Rust 2005)  Clarify expectations and keep students busy from day one  Pace learning Allow for slow learning Multi-staged assessment Self and peer assessment Build in development of skills and opportunities for students to test their growing competence in non-threatening way

Maximising potential  Positive reinforcement  Allow for early failure (and risk taking)  Tasks which are too difficult can cause ‘giving up’  Ensure curriculum encourages development  Build in sub-goals, ‘stage posts’  Make early assessment primarily formative (Mantz Yorke 2001)

Enhance Feedback  Students need sufficient feedback if they are to learn  ‘The purposes of feedback are to motivate students, to inform how well they have done and how to improve’ (Brown G) Feedback should focus on performance, their learning and things within their control  ‘It should be timely, meaningful, encouraging and offer suggestions for improvement’  Feedback should be received, attended to and acted upon by the student (Rust 2005)

Social constructivist assessment process  Social constructivism: knowledge is shaped and evolved through a complexity of interactions within and between different communities  Involve students in every stage of the assessment process. This involvement should result in better work (Rust)  Discuss assessment with students from day one – negotiate assessment?

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 2005

Some thoughts for PM  Ideas drawn from PBL (Macdonald and Savin-Baden 2004)  Base assessment in a ‘practice context’ – real or simulated  Assess what professional does – process based activity, underpinned by knowledge skills and attitudes  Assessment should reflect learner’s development from novice to expert practitioner  Enable student to appreciate that in the professional capacity, clients, peers and others will be ‘assessing’ them  Encourage self-assessment, evaluation and reflection as a basis for future CPD

Finally  ‘Students can, with difficulty escape from the effects of poor teaching, they cannot (by definition if they wish to graduate) escape the effects of poor assessment’. (Boud 1995)  Assessment is not an exact science  The assessor needs to be reflective  Well designed assessment should enable the learner to continue to learn and develop - more ‘critical beings’