Matthew Dean Faculty of Technology (Teaching and Learning)

 Can a combination of electronic marking grids (eGrids) and viva based driving tests…  Improve the quality of student feedback?  Optimise staff time spent in assessment?

“How will I cope?” ◦ Voluntary severance ◦ New duties ◦ Potentially excessive marking load

 Action Research Approach  Mock NSS Results ◦ Entire year minus module ◦ Module only  Access logs  Student and Staff Focus Groups  Observation and Reflection  eGrids used on two second year modules

 Multimedia and Internet Technology ◦ Existing module modified to eGrid assessment ◦ 4 x assessment points  Internet Software Development ◦ New module written with eGrids in mind ◦ 3 x assessment points  Both Modules ◦ 100% Coursework ◦ Extensive use of on-line videos ◦ 1 x 2hr Lab, 1 x Lecture ◦ All TLA provided at the start

 Viva based assessment  Allows multiple attempts  Peer learning  Limiting factors ◦ One test a week ◦ Three “time outs” ◦ Sliding scale of marks ◦ Only assessed in taught session  Used so far only on “small” assessments

 Confidentiality – G6.77 Account  Server creates the grids  Read only access for student  Students may model grades  Read write access for staff  Staff update grid with grades + feedback  Split into “credit categories”  Grades may be 0, 25, 50, 70 or 100%  Grade is time sensitive

 Claims for Credit ◦ Self + peer assessment ◦ May be limited to a single credit category  Formative Claims  (25% claims)  Review weeks  Time built into taught sessions for assessment  Summative Claims  After assignment deadline (time sensitive grade)  Continuous Claims  Theoretical aspects (time sensitive grade)

Module only %Minus module % Assessment and FeedbackABCDEABCDE The criteria used in marking have been clear in advance Assessment arrangements and marking have been fair Feedback on my work has been prompt I have received detailed comments on my work Feedback on my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand A = Definitely Agree, B = Mostly Agree, C= Neither Agree Nor Disagree, D = Disagree, E= Definitely Disagree (60 Students over 2 Programmes involving 3 Staff)

 Staff Perspective ◦ Marking a lonely and boring activity – this approach is anything but ◦ Significant reduction in marking out of class ◦ Quite an intense process ◦ Get to know students ◦ Sensitive to staff absence ◦ Can be quite hard to tell a student to their face their work is not up to scratch ◦ Feedback must be constructive and positive ◦ Possibly demanding for staff new to teaching / new to module content

 Teaching and Learning ◦ Mechanism is initially alien to both staff and students – some confusion, conflict and anxiety ◦ Positive impact on plagiarism – ownership of work ◦ Staff and students develop consensus on quality ◦ Moderation of work possibly an issue

 Management ◦ Time to plan prior to delivery (not a luxury I had this time) ◦ Timing of assessments, we need to provide time for students to reflect and engage – less may well be more! ◦ Number and nature of credit categories need to be thought through in advance ◦ Changing grids once teaching has started is a problem ◦ Collating grades needs addressing ◦ Update of staff data entry

 Student Perspective ◦ Students become active participants in assessment ◦ Loud cheer of “yes” when asked if they like this approach ◦ Reduced impact on loss of work ◦ Not all students engage with the process ◦ (true of whatever we do!)

 Carry out remaining research activities  (Focus groups etc.)  Obtain views of non engaging students

 Seek the advice of others  Action research  Obtain copies of successful applications  Focus on one topic  Research something you were going to do anyway  Make it sexy