Planning Assessment Methods for Student Work

1. Planning Assessment Methods for Student Work TF NETTIE BOIVIN IPGKBA – July 2012 Workshop- Adapted from PFA University of York by Jen Winters and Karen Clegg

2. By the end of the session you will be able to: • Use grading criteria to mark student work • Determine whether assessment methods are fit for purpose LEARNING OUTCOMES

3. In groups of 3-4 come up with 9 reasons why we assess student work. Please put each reason on a separate post-it note. www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ3USs16J3Y

4. Most Important Least Important

5. Diagnostic: indicator of a learner’s aptitude and preparedness for a programme of study and identifies possible learning problems Formative: designed to give feedback on progress and inform development Summative: provides a measure of achievement made in respect to learning outcomes Forms of Assessment

6. The assessment measures what it is meant to measure (i.e. the learning outcomes): • It does not assess memory, (LOQ) when it is supposed to be assessing problem-solving (HOQ) (and vice versa). • It does not grade someone on the quality of their writing, when topic content is being assessed, Validity From www.learningandteaching.info

7. The assessment will have the same results if reproduced: • The same group taking the assessment again would get the same results • Given a large enough sample size, the results will be the same with subsequent groups of participants Reliability

8. The assessment allows each participant an equal chance of success: • Excludes personal bias such as whether a student has participated in seminars (where this is not an element of the assessment criteria) Fairness

10. # of Students Normative Assessment (the grade curve) Grade

11. Normative Referencing Pros • Recognises the differences within a cohort • Corrects for difficulty of the assessment method • Incites competition for grades to improve student performance Cons • Achievement is relative to the cohort rather than absolute • Improvement in learning and teaching is not reflected in the outcome • Discourages collaborative learning

12. A Common Problem

13. The performance on the assessment is marked against the assessment criteria without reference to the performance of the cohort or to past performance Criterion Referencing

14. Criterion Referencing Pros • Achievement measured against a set standard • Individual achievement can be measured (and compared) Cons • Assessment method must be inherently fair, as the results cannot be corrected or “normalised” later

15. Learning Outcomes Constructive Alignment

16. Learning outcomes should: • be written in the future tense • identify important learning requirements • be achievable and assessable • use clear language easily understandable to students Learning Outcomes

17. Learning Outcomes Constructive Alignment Assessment Methods

18. At the end of this course you should be able to: • define the terms wavelength, frequency, amplitude and node. • recall the relative frequencies or wavelengths of the various regions in the electromagnetic spectrum • describe the Bohr model of the atom and use it to account for the emission line spectra of the H atom • use the Rydberg equation to predict the wavelengths of electronic transitions • describe the concept of particle wave duality • explain the Heisenberg Uncertainly Principle and discuss the ramifications of it Example from the Higher Education Academy

19. Learning Outcomes Teaching Methods/Materials Constructive Alignment Assessment Methods

20. Assessment is an essay question on a first year exam in an “Environmental Epidemiology” class The question is: “consider the evidence that bathing in the sea in Britain is harmful to health” You have 100% to play with Task: Create a Marking Scheme

21. Look at the various grade descriptors used by departments. How might these be used to help students improve on their work? Using Grade Descriptors

22. Types of Assessment How many types of assessment can we come up with?

23. Assessment must be: Reliable Valid Fair What other things are each of these assessment methods measuring? What can be done to mitigate the inherent unfairness of each method? Equity in Assessment

24. http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/aso/learningandteaching/assessment_and_feedback.htmhttp://www.york.ac.uk/admin/aso/learningandteaching/assessment_and_feedback.htm http://vle.york.ac.uk/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2fwebapps%2fblackboard%2fexecute%2flauncher%3ftype%3dCourse%26id%3d_24159_1%26url%3d Further Information/ Reading

25. Nicol, D. (2007). Principles of good assessment and feedback: Theory and practice. From the REAP International Online Conference on Assessment Design for Learner Responsibility,29th-31st May, 2007. Available at http://ewds.strath.ac.uk/REAP07 Re-Engineering Assessment Practices in Scottish Higher Education (REAP) is funded by the Scottish Funding Council under its e-Learning Transformation initiative. Further information about REAP can be found at http://www.reap.ac.uk Clegg, K. (2011). Preparing Future Academics Planning and Assessment Methods for Students workhop. References