Empowering Students through Choice of Assessment Methods

1
Empowering Students through Choice of Assessment
Methods

• 20th January 2011, Dr Geraldine ONeill,
• UCD Teaching and Learning

For full paper, see ONeill et al, (2010)
http//ocs.aishe.org/index.php/international/2010
/paper/view/155/87
2

• Empowering students to take some responsibility
  in how and what they learn is a student-centred
  approach (ONeill McMahon, 2005).
• By extending this decision-making to students
  having a choice of assessment methods allows
  them to take some control of their learning. Good
  assessment practice (Craddick Mathias, 2009
  Fowell et al, 1999)
• This is also supports an inclusive assessment
  approach (UCD project HEA funded (Rose
  Meyer, 2000 Healey et al., 2008).

Driver 1
Student-centred
Choice of Assessment
3
LiteratureChoice of assessment methods within a
module
Students perform better according to first choice
(Jackson Williams, 2003 Cassidy, 2007)
Both assessment choices should have coherent
alignment with learning, outcomes, assessment
criteria, marking procedures, .. (Craddock
Mathias, 2009)
Staff should take steps to empower their (1st
Year) students by creating a student-centred
curriculum through which students can take
control of, and responsibility for, their own
learning. (The Quality Assurance Agency for
Higher Education, 2008) (see also UCD Education
Strategy)
Students very positive towards empowerment, with
older students more receptive (Francis, 2008)
4
However,
Parity of effort (support, etc) must be built
into assessment design and communicated to
students. (Easterbrook et al, 2005)
5
Methodology Design Process

• Template for two purposes
• a) Staff equity consideration and
• b) information for giving student an informed
  choice.

• Sections

• Choice of diverse assessment (two choices)
• Weighting to module
• Details
• Why it might suit students
• Learning outcomes to be assessed
• Assessment criteria
• Marking procedures
• T L activities
• Feedback mechanisms
• Workload
• Examples of assessments, if unfamiliar

6
Methodology Student presentation

• Student were all given a face to face
  introduction, in week one, to their choice of
  assessments.
• The motivation behind it was explained, i.e. to
  allow them to play their strengths, take some
  control over their learning.

• They were all given the Student Information
  Equity Template (also put on Blackboard) to
  help make informed choice.
• Assessment Examples were put on Blackboard
  where available.
• Students were also given a set date (weeks 2-4)
  to inform staff of choice.

7
Last years Modules (2009/2010 only) The Case
Studies
Modules Student Level/ Numbers Weight. of choice Method Choices (Choose A or B) Group v Individual Choices Timing Choices More continuous versus end of semester choice
Module 1. Development Advanced Pharmacology Level 3 UG Students n60 20 A. Group poster (N 1 group) Group only Both same time
Module 1. Development Advanced Pharmacology Level 3 UG Students n60 20 B. Group oral (N 10 groups) Group only Both same time
Module 2 Ecological and Environmental Microbiology Level 3 UG Students n56 50 A. Problem-solving assignments (N42 students) Individual only More continuous versus end of semester
Module 2 Ecological and Environmental Microbiology Level 3 UG Students n56 50 B. Seen exam N14 students) Individual only More continuous versus end of semester
Module 3. Human Rights Law and Equality Level 4 (Masters) PG Students n33 100 A. Group project/individual (N28 students) Group (with the individual aspect) assignment versus Individual More continuous versus end of semester
Module 3. Human Rights Law and Equality Level 4 (Masters) PG Students n33 100 B. Essay (N5 students) Group (with the individual aspect) assignment versus Individual More continuous versus end of semester
8
This years Modules
Modules Level/ No Weight. of choice Method Choices (Choose A or B) Group v Individual Choices Timing Choices
Module 4. Computer Science Data Mining (Tahar Kechadi) Level 4 n50 20 A. Homework Tutorials Individual only Both Continuous
Module 4. Computer Science Data Mining (Tahar Kechadi) Level 4 n50 20 B. Project work Individual only Both Continuous
Module 5 The Making of Early Modern France (Jean-Michel Picard) Level 1 n20 100 A. Group Presentation Group only Both same time
Module 5 The Making of Early Modern France (Jean-Michel Picard) Level 1 n20 100 B Group poster Group only Both same time
Module 5 The Making of Early Modern France (Jean-Michel Picard) Level 1 n20 100 A. Essay Individual only Both same time
Module 5 The Making of Early Modern France (Jean-Michel Picard) Level 1 n20 100 B Audio-visual assignment Individual only Both same time
Module 6 Medicine Research Elective (Amanda McCann) Level 3 n20 50 A Poster Individual only Both same time
Module 6 Medicine Research Elective (Amanda McCann) Level 3 n20 50 B. oral presentation Individual only Both same time
9
To be designed
Module 7. Forensic Radiography Medicine and Medical Science (Jonathan McNulty) Level 4 n20 50 Essay Individual only More continuous versus end of semester
Module 7. Forensic Radiography Medicine and Medical Science (Jonathan McNulty) Level 4 n20 50 B. On-line wiki contributions Individual only More continuous versus end of semester
10
Evaluation Methods

• Staff Interviews
• (module co-ordinators)

• Student Questionnaire including a 20 statement
  scale that measures the Positive Experience of
  Assessment Methods Choice (PEAMC)

11
Positive Experience of Assessment Methods
Choice Scale (PEAMC).

• This included subscales that addressed
• level of anxiety in choosing assessment
• equity between assessment methods
• the diversity of choice
• sense of empowerment in choosing
• and support given during the process.

12
Results/Demographics

• Full sample student population was n 149.
• 97 students returned the questionnaire, a
  response rate of 65.
• 27 were male (27) and 67 were female (68).
• 17 identified themselves as mature students, i.e.
  over 23 years of age (17).

13
(No Transcript)
14
The majority of student (82) were glad with
their choice and those students not satisfied
(9) with their choice noted that the workload on
the assessment should be slightly reduced for
that assessment.
15
Implication, choosing well is important
16
Mature Students Stronger Preference
17
Empowerment Theme Median of Questionnaire Statements (N 3 module, 97 students) Empowerment Theme Median of Questionnaire Statements (N 3 module, 97 students)
I appreciated being given a choice of assessment methods Strongly Agree
I felt I had should have had more control of my assessment in this module Disagree
Anxiety Theme Median of Questionnaire Statements (N 3 module, 97 students) Anxiety Theme Median of Questionnaire Statements (N 3 module, 97 students)
Having a choice of assessment reduced some of the stress I normally experience with assessment Agree
I found it stressful to have to chose an assessment method Disagree
18
Diversity Theme Median of Questionnaire Statements Diversity Theme Median of Questionnaire Statements
Having a choice of assessment method allowed me to play to my strengths Agree
I would like to have had a wider variety of choices of assessment methods in this module Undecided

• -I struggle with calculations sometimes, so
  thought the essay would give me a better chance
  to show other strengths (S6)

19

• Special Accommodation (SA)

• More Hidden Accommodations

• one student did not require SA, as assessment
  used a more visual than verbal format. (staff
  observ.)
• Another student, who requires SA for an
  examination format, chose the continuous
  assessment option and reduced need for SA ..
  this student remarked on the benefits of not
  having to have this organised especially for her
  (staff observ.)

• Home-life arrangements (student quote).
• Social Class (staff observ.)
• Organisational skills (student quote).
• Demands of parallel modules (student quote).
• I could work from home (Galway!!) (student
  quote).

20
Accommodated Competing Diversities

• Personally, I prefer end of semester exams.(S35)

• I don't do well under exam circumstances.(S15)

21
Challenged staff pre-conceptions about what is
academic work.

• I (lecturer) am now considering, that is it
  possible that you can talk about theory..It
  doesnt have to be in the written format, all the
  time. We have (in the past) exclusively assessed
  by written work. (staff quote)

22
Equity
Equity Theme Median of Questionnaire Statements Equity Theme Median of Questionnaire Statements
The assessment method I chose was not explained as well as the other assessment method Disagree
Over the course of the semester, the workload (and level of feedback ) for my choice appeared similar to the other assessment method(s) Agree
I was satisfied with the examples available of my assessment method compared to the examples of the other assessment method Undecided
23
Equity of Grades
Options A (Less traditional) Options B (Traditional)
Group poster Group oral
Problem-solving Seen exam
Group project/individual Essay
Median Grade B Median Grade B

• Overall grades were higher, than previous year.
  However, some student groups (who were good
  performers in class, engaged and articulate, but
  often underachieve) did better than usual.

24
Summary of Students ExperienceVery Positive

• However, students suggested

Two choices was enough

• I feel that giving choice of assessment methods
  has allowed me to show my strengths in research
  and understanding concepts,

And some better examples
25
 Staff Recommendations for Practice

• A) Careful planning of the choices and then B)
  articulating these choices clearly to the
  students. They advocated the use of the Student
  Information Template for both.
• Choice of assessment in this project was
  introduced early, then students had to sign off
  on this. Some of the staff suggested a cooling
  off period to allow students to change options.
• The staff recommended that consideration be given
  to having quite diverse assessments, to maximise
  on student diversity.
• Whereas, all staff advocated the choice of
  assessment within a module, it also should be
  considered at programme level.

26

• Programme Approach advantages disadvantages

• Module Approach
• advantages disadvantages

• Allows students choose, from a set choice of
  assessment methods,
• Could be extended to allow students negotiate
  their own choice (negotiated assessment, learning
  contracts..)
• More student controlled,
• However, essential skills/competencies need to be
  monitored, i.e. writing skills cannot be
  completely avoided.

• Allows students experience a range of planned
  alternative assessments systematically over the
  period of a programme (Knight, 2000)
• Efficient use of resources
• Can be mapped to Graduate Attributes (ONeill,
  2009 Treleaven Voola, 2008)
• However, staff, and not student, controlled.

27

• For further details

• Acknowledgment

• on this project/research, contact the project
  co-ordinator Dr Geraldine ONeill
• 00 353 1-7162839, geraldine.m.oneill_at_ucd.
• See also http//www.ucd.ie/teaching/projects/choic
  eofassessmentmethods/

• HEA Training of Trainers Funding for supporting
  this project.

28

• References
•  Ashworth, M., Bloxham, S., Pearce, L. (2010).
  Examining the tension between academic
• standards and inclusion for disabled students
  the impact on marking of individual academics'
  frameworks for assessment, Studies in Higher
  Education, 35 2, 209-22
• Cassidy, S. (2007). Assessing inexperienced
  students ability to self assess Exploring links
  with
• learning style and academic personal control,
  Assessment Evaluation in Higher Education 32
  31330.
• Craddock, D., Mathias, H. (2009). Assessment
  options in higher education, Assessment
  Evaluation in Higher Education, 342,127- 140.
• Entwistle, N.J., Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to
  learning, evaluations of teaching and preferences
• for contrasting academic environments. Higher
  Education 19 16994.
• Francis, R. A.(2008). An investigation into the
  receptivity of undergraduate students to
  assessment empowerment, Assessment Evaluation
  in Higher Education, 335,547557
• Fowell, S. L., Southgate, L. J. Bligh, J. G.
  (1999). Evaluating assessment the missing link?
  Medical Education 334, 276-281.
• Easterbrook, D., Parker, M., Waterfield, J.,
  (2005) Engineering Subject Centre Mini Project
  Assessment Choice Case Study. HEA-Engineering
  Subject Centre. http//www.engsc.ac.uk/downloads/p
  dfs/Resource/assessmentchoice.pdf accessed 8th
  July 2010.
• Garside, J., Nhemachena, J, Z., Williams, J.,
  Topping, A. (2009) Repositioning assessment
  Giving students the choice of assessment
  methods. Nurse Education in Practice. 9, 141-148.
  

29

•  
• Healey, M., Roberts, H., Fuller, M., Georgeson,
  J., Hurst, A., Kelly., K., Riddell, S., Weedon,
  E. (2008). Reasonable adjustments and disabled
  students experience of learning, teaching and
  assessment. Interchange, Spring 2008,
  http//www.tla.ed.ac.uk/interchange/spring2008/hea
  ley2.pdf accessed 7th July 2010.
• Hanafin, J, Shevlin, M. , Kenny, M, McNeela E.
  (2007). Including young people with disabilities
  Assessment challenges in higher education,
  Higher Education, 54, 435-448.
• Jackson, R.H.G., Williams, M.R.. (2003). Are
  undergraduate preferences as to method of
  assessment well-founded and rational? Research
  paper 2003-1 Cardiff University of Wales.
  http//66.102.1.104/scholar?hlenlrqcacheP81s
  N9lSAlAJwww.aber.ac.uk/smba/english_ver/research/
  rsp2003/rp2003-1.pdfJacksonandWilliamsAreunde
  rgraduatepreferencesastomethodofassessmentw
  ellfoundedand rationale2003 accessed 25th
  June, 2007.
• Knight, P.T. (2000) The Value of a Programme-wide
  approach to Assessment. Assessment Evaluation,
  25 (3), 237-251
• Lowe, K. Marshall, L. (2004). Plotting renewal
  Pushing curriculum boundaries using a web based
  graduate attribute mapping tool. In R. Atkinson,
  C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer R. Phillips (Eds),
  Beyond the comfort zone Proceedings of the 21st
  ASCILITE Conference (pp. 548-557). Perth, 5-8
  December. http//www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/p
  erth04/procs/lowe-k.html
• Nightingale, P., Te Wiata, I., Toohey, S., Ryan,
  G., Hughes, C., Magin, D. (1996) Assessing
  learning in Universities. Sydney University of
  New South Wales Press.
• ONeill, G., McMahon, T. (2005).
  Student-Centred Learning What does it mean for
  students and lecturers? In, Emerging Issues in
  the Practice of University Learning and Teaching
  pp. 27-36. Dublin AISHE publication.
• ONeill, G. (2010). UCD Inclusive Assessment
  Project. http//www.ucd.ie/teaching/projects/choic
  eofassessmentmethods/ accessed 12th July 2010.
• ONeill, G. (2009) A programme-wide approach to
  assessment a reflection on some curriculum
  mapping tools. Paper presented at AISHE, Dublin.
  http//ocs.aishe.org/aishe/index.php/international
  /2009/schedConf/presentations

30

• ONeill, G., Doyle, E., OBoyle, K., Clipson, N.
  (2010) Choice of Assessment Methods within a
  Module Students Experiences and Staff
  Recommendations for Practice. Dublin AISHE
  Conference Presentation/Paper publication,
  26th/27th August, 2010,
• http//ocs.aishe.org/index.php/international/2010
  /paper/view/155/87
• Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education
  (2008), p4 http//www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docu
  ments/firstyear/Personalisation20-20Final.pdf
• Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) (2003). Learning
  from subject review 19932001 Sharing good
  practice. Glouchester Quality Assurance Agency
  for Higher Education.
• Treleaven, L. Voola, R. (2008) Integrating the
  Development of Graduate Attributes Through
  Constructive Alignment. Journal of Marketing
  Education, 30 160
• Rose, D. Meyer, A. (2000). Universal Design for
  Learning Journal of Special Education Technology
  15 1, Winter 2002
• Waterfield, J. West, B. (2006). Alternative and
  inclusive assessment case studies - a staff
  development resource, In Inclusive Assessment in
  Higher Education A Resource for Change
  University of Plymouth. Plymouth, SPACE Project
  - http//www.plymouth.ac.uk/pages/view.asp?page1
  0494 Accessed July 2010 .
• Waterfield, J., West, R. Parker, M. (2006)
  Developing an Assessment Toolkit in Inclusive
  Learning in Higher Education, In (Eds.) Adams, M.
  and Brown, S. Towards Inclusive Learning in
  Higher Education Developing Curricula for
  Disabled Students Routledge London
• Wiggins, G. McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding
  by Design. Second Edition. Alexandria, Virginia
  Association for Supervision and Curriculum
  Development.