120 likes | 336 Views
Aims. To explore how dialogue can be used:To assess knowledgeTo assess practiceTo evidence reflection on practiceTo assess professional learning5 universities across UKNovember 2009 December 2010. Structure of Presentation. Introduction to the ProjectDiscussion of theory and support for D
E N D
1. Using Dialogue as an Assessment Tool Conference Paper July 2010
2. Aims To explore how dialogue can be used:
To assess knowledge
To assess practice
To evidence reflection on practice
To assess professional learning
5 universities across UK
November 2009 – December 2010
3. Structure of Presentation Introduction to the Project
Discussion of theory and support for Dialogue as an Assessment tool
Methodology
Emerging issues
training assessors, issues of judgement, evidence of reflection, evidencing scholarship, process questions, managing and facilitating dialogue
Conclusions: Questions and Answers
4. The Project Using dialogue to assess students, staff
Using dialogue to assess professional learning: competence, using standards
Transcription of recorded dialogue; sharing and reflection on process; interviews with assessment protagonists (assessors, students)
Analysis of transcripts for evidence of reflection, learning, evidence around practice, professional achievement
Review of process, challenges, benefits through interviews
Analysis of how dialogue constructed; themes; evidence to inform judgement
Recommendations to others for practice
Validation of dialogue as tool for assessment
5. Examples of use Critical discussions
APEL /APL processes
Reflective dialogues
Professional conversations
Dialogue with evidence
Group assessment
Presentations
Narrative, story-telling
6. Dialogue defined Sharing, exchange
Between peers
Participatory
Open-endedness
Unknowns
Talk between 2 or more people in which thoughts feelings and ideas are expressed, questions are asked and answered, or information exchanged
7. Characteristic Elements Trust
Empathy
Honesty
Sincerity
Openness
Learning
Self awareness
Growth
Mutual responsibility
Listen
Challenge
Interrogation
Inquiry
Exploration
Reflection and critique
Shared knowledge
Process
Multiple levels of communication
8. Defining dialogue
9. A Comparison Written
Static, superficial, write to order,
Writing reflectively
Emergence of values
Word limit
Limited opportunity to probe, question, explore
Evidence all present
Easier to grade? Dialogue
Multi-layered
Flexible
Easier to reflect
Engagement easier to show and explore
Opportunity to probe, question
Depth of learning
Avoids plagiarism
Natural when talking about self and practice
May need back-up evidence
10. Model of UCLan dialogue Mentor – mentee process (Brockbank & McGill)
Criterion led professional conversation (Bowen Clewley)
Appreciative Dialogue (Ghaye)
Assessment process (O’Donovan et al)
Self and Peer assessment (Yorke & Knight; Bryan & Clegg)
Socialisation, literacy (Lea & Goodfellow);
individual construction of professional knowledge (Shulman, Eraut, Boud);
Work-based, informal learning (Boud);
Values-led, professional and reflective (SEDA/UK PSF, Moon, Larrivee);
Organisational learning and change models (Pedlar, Burgoyne, Easterby-smith, Kotler)
11. Interesting Outcomes: Preliminary analysis:
Construction of dialogue, facilitation
When is a dialogue a dialogue?
Appreciative aspects
Evidence to support judgement
Evidence of rigour
Level of Reflection
Evidence of scholarly practice
Value for individual
12. Conclusions Assessment of informal professional learning
Creation of a learning space
Re-profiling idea of HE professional
Re-configuring teaching and learning
A career development and CPD tool
Means of organisational change
Seeking case studies
13. References: Brockbank A & McGill I 2007 Facilitating Reflective Learning in HE SRHE/OUP 2nd Ed.
Bowen Clewley L ‘Assessing against competency standards in the workplace’ in 207-227 in Arguelles & Gonczi (2000)
Easterby Smith
Eraut M 1997 Professional Learning and Competence
Ghaye T & Lillyman S 2006 Learning Journals and Critical Incidents RP for HE Professionals 2nd Ed Quay Books London
O’Donovan B, Price M and Rust C (2004) ‘Know what I mean? Enhancing Students understanding of assessment standards and criteria’ in Teaching in HE Vol 9, No 3, July 2004
Knight P & Yorke M (2003) Assessment Learning and Employability SRHE/OUP
Boud D and Falchikov N Eds Rethinking assessment in HE 2007 Routledge
Bryan C & Clegg K 2006 Innovative Assessment in HE Routledge
Goodfellow R & Lea MR (2007) Challenging E-learning in the University: a literacies perspective SRHE / OUP
Larrivee, Barbara(2008)'Development of a tool to assess teachers' level of reflective practice', Reflective Practice,9:3,341 — 360
Moon J (2004) A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory & Practice Routledge Falmer
Pedler M (1996), Action Learning for Managers, The Learning Company Project
Pedler M, Burgoyne J, Boydell 1997 The Learning Company McGraw Hill, Berkshire
Shulman LS ‘Knowledge and Teaching’ pp61-77 in Leach J, Moon B (eds) (1999) Learners and Pedagogy Sage/ Paul Chapman pubs