1 / 12

Efficiency vs effectiveness of assessment – the tensions Chris Rust

Explore the tensions between efficiency and effectiveness of current assessment practices, with a focus on promoting deeper learning approaches. Address issues such as resource allocation, validity, reliability, and feedback improvement strategies.

valerian
Download Presentation

Efficiency vs effectiveness of assessment – the tensions Chris Rust

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Efficiency vs effectivenessof assessment – the tensionsChris Rust

  2. Lots of evidence current practices are not very effective nor very efficient • QAA subject reviews • National Student survey • “the Achilles’ heel of quality” /Summative assessment practices “in disarray” (Knight 2002a, p.107; Knight 2002b, p.275)/“Broken” (Race 2003, p. 5) • “There is considerable scope for professional development in the area of assessment” (Yorke 2000, p7) • “No longer fit for purpose” (Burgess 2007, p5) • Media accusations of dumbing down & grade inflation: 60% gaining 1sts & 2.1s in 2010 cf 30% in 1970 (Sunday Telegraph, 2/1/11, p6) • “serious grounds for concern” (IUSS 2009, p116)

  3. Danger our assessment practices encourage a Surface approach to learning “The types of assessment we currently use do not promote conceptual understanding and do not encourage a deep approach to learning………Our means of assessing them seems to do little to encourage them to adopt anything other than a strategic or mechanical approach to their studies.” “…students become more interested in the mark and less interested in the subject over the course of their studies.”(Newstead 2002, p2) Many research findings indicate a declining use of deep and contextual approaches to study as students’ progress through their degree programmes (Watkins & Hattie, 1985; Gow & Kember, 1990; McKay & Kember,1997; Richardson, 2000; Zhang & Watkins, 2001; Arum & Roksa, 2011)

  4. Resources and Validity vs Reliability[Dependability: one-handed clock (Stobart, 2008)] Construct validity (authenticity) Manageability (resources) Reliability

  5. Resources and Validity vs Reliability Construct validity (authenticity) ‘This quest for reliability tends to skew assessment towards the assessment of simple and unambiguous achievements, and considerations of cost add to the skew away from judgements of complex learning’ (Knight 2002, p278) Manageability (resources) Reliability

  6. Resources and Validity vs Reliability Construct validity (authenticity) assessing airline pilots Manageability (resources) Reliability

  7. Resources and Validity vs Reliability Construct validity (authenticity) assessing airline pilots trade-off, dependant on context Manageability (resources) Reliability

  8. Resources and Validity vs Reliability Construct validity (authenticity) if more purely formative assessment, could increase authenticity with less cost? Manageability (resources) Reliability

  9. Resources and Validity vs Reliability Construct validity (authenticity) if more purely formative assessment, could increase authenticity if less summative assessment, could afford/ should aspire for it to be here? Manageability (resources) Reliability

  10. Module assessment vs Programme assessment Module assessment • Atomised/disconnected • Problems with feedback carry-over • Less challenging • What ‘whole’ do the parts add up to? (NB aggregation) • More than necessary to make summative judgements • High staff workload • Problems with bunching But… CATS & ? Flexibility/choice Programme assessment • Fewer, integrated, more challenging and authentic assessment possible • Allows for ‘slow learning’ • Better summative judgements • Reduced staff workload But... logistically very difficult in a modular system, especially problems with credit and flexibility

  11. Equivalence of demand: choice vs standardisation • Equivalence of demand should consider total expected student learning hours, not try to single out assessment • Any standardisation should avoid confusing consistency with conformity, and a reliance on often ‘numbers-based’ rules (e.g. 1st year essays 3,000 words max, 3rd year essays 5,000 words max; or, no more than two pieces of assessment per module) and crude word-equivalence

  12. Improving feedback: a potential win/win Staff originated • High staff workload (especially with large classes) • Problems with speed of return • Frequently not read or understood • A monologue Involving students (self and peer-assessment, marking exercises, etc.) • Can reduce staff workload – certainly over the programme • Can be more immediate • Becomes a dialogue • Increases students’ assessment literacy • Improves quality of students’ work • Essential graduate attributes

More Related