1. Learning to judge student work in the academic workplace Jeff Jawitz Centre for Higher Education Development, UCT Work in progress towards PhD Presentation for the Education Students’ 6 th Regional Research Conference UWC, Oct 2006

2. Understanding learning in the academic workplace Two windows: Assessment New academics The research question How do new academics learn to judge student performance in complex assessment tasks? The context: SAU – an historically white research intensive South African university about ten years after the first democratic elections.

3. Key conceptual framework Social Practice Theory (Bourdieu) Field Capital Habitus Situated learning theory (Lave and Wenger) Communities of practice (CoP) Legitimate peripheral participation (LPP)

4. DeptCapital valued at entry A (Social Science) Teaching & Research Experience of tutoring/teaching as postgraduate and Masters research. B (Natural Science) Research PhD and several years of post doc experience. C (Design) Professional Experience of professional practice and some part time teaching. Entry requirements for new academics

5. Communities of Practice in Dept A (Social Science) Communities of Practice in Dept A (Social Science) U/G Teaching CoP Junior and middle academics, post grads, part- time staff (Newcomers start here) Research COP researchers P/G Teaching CoP Middle and senior academics postgrad tutor→ undergrad teaching CoP → research CoP

6. Learning to judge in Dept A (Social Science)   Two CoP’s - separate sites of participation for new and old academics.   Undergrad CoP – “friendly” - strong support network. Support for post grad tutors’ marking (essays) – strong LPP – but marginal - new & junior academics mentor tutors in assessment practice.   Honours Long paper – aligned with research CoP. All academics mark – High stakes – no peripherality. Double marking- Power issues. U/G Teaching CoP Junior and middle academics, post grads, part- time staff (Newcomers start here) Research COP researchers P/G Teaching CoP Middle and senior academics

7. Learning to judge trajectory in Dept A (Social Science)

8. Communities of Practice in Dept B (Natural Science) Communities of Practice in Dept B (Natural Science) Research COP Whole dept including Post docs, post grads, research assistants, fulltime researchers. (Newcomers start here) Teaching COP Academic staff only Postgrad student → research CoP (as postdoc) → teaching CoP

9. Learning to judge in Dept B (Natural Science)   Curriculum strongly aligned with Research CoP. View assessment as ‘objective’ search for ‘right mark’ -individual private activity – independent,‘unbiased’ judgement. No discussion – new academics – isolated and alone.   Honours research paper – aligned with Research CoP. Double marking - differences resolved arithmetically. (Take the average)   New black academic – caught between student perception that assessment is biased & own experience of his own black student being failed by two white markers – cannot talk to anyone about it.   Valuing of outside staff development opportunities. Research COP Whole dept including Post docs, postgrads, research assistants, fulltime researchers. (Newcomers start here) Teaching COP Academic staff only

10. Learning to judge trajectory in Dept B (Natural Science)

11. Communities of Practice in Dept C (Design) Communities of Practice in Dept C (Design) U/G Teaching COP Junior and middle academics p/t teachers & examiners Profession CoP Professional practitioners (Newcomers start here) P/G Teaching CoP p/t teachers & examiners middle & senior academics Student → professional → pt teaching assistant/examiner → undergrad CoP → Profession CoP

12. Learning to judge in Dept C (Design)   Separate sites of participation for new & old academics. Little sense of ‘community’ – isolation despite informal mentors.   Curriculum & assessment strongly aligned with Profession CoP. Large numbers of professional part time teaching staff   NB of experience of assessment judgements as a student.   Widespread use of teams of markers – negotiations to reach consensus on marks – some degree of peripherality   Access to strong verbal and public discourse around assessment. U/G Teaching COP Junior and middle academics p/t teachers & examiners Profession CoP Professional practitioners (Newcomers start here) P/G Teaching CoP p/t teachers & examiners Middle & senior academics

13. Learning to judge trajectory in Dept C (Design)

14. Key findings Structuring effect of the field evident in the   capital that is valued   configuration of communities of practice   different academic career trajectories followed by new academics.   shape the assessment practice The process of learning to judge – has an internal structure dependent on relationships between CoP’s – learning trajectory shaped by particular disciplinary context. Role of individual agency evident in help seeking behaviour; boundary crossing; contributions to transformation.