ANY A HIGGINSa.higgins@herts.ac.ukSenior Lecturer Sport Studies

USING FLIP CAMERA IN ASSESSMENT

OUTCOMES

• To overview the rationale and logistical implementation of a new assessment mechanism with a Year 1 mixed cohort with the aim of improving pass rates.

• To provide some critical reflections of using camera based assessment processes

OVERVIEW

• Year 1 Mixed Cohort of 125 registered students

• Introduction to Sport Management

• 1 Module Coordinator

• High fail rates

• BSc Sport Studies & Joint Honours students- noticeable differences in performance

PREVIOUS CW PERFORMANCES

CW 2008 2009 JH (36) 33% (78) 29% SPS (42) 47% (51) 52%

YEAR 2006 2007 2008 2009 CW/EX CW EX CW EX CW EX CW EX MEAN 51% 35% 48% 47% 38% 41% 37% 38% STUDENT NUMBERS

82 131

PPPPREVIOUS PERFORMANCE 2008-2009

ISSUES & ACTIONS

• 15 Credit Module • Previous assessment strategy = 2 x CW & 1 EX

• Timing of Feedback & Assessment Overload?• Increasing numbers

• Minimising Size of Assessment 1 & Incorporating Group Assessment Strategy

• 2009 MEF Video Peer Assessment

• Encouraging contact between student & lecturer

• Developing reciprocity and cooperation among students

• Gives prompt feedback• Emphasises time on task• Respects diverse talents and ways of learning

Chickering & Gamson (1987)

Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick (2005)

• 7 Principles of Good Feedback Practice • Delivers high quality information to students about

learning• Encourage peer dialogue with lecturer• Clarify what good performance is• Facilitate self-assessment• Encourages positivity & self esteem• Closes gap between current & desired performance• Informs teachers to help shape teaching

INTRODUCING FLIP CAMERA

Semester A- used informally with Level 2 ModuleRecord mini lectures/ uploaded to Studynet/ Generic summative assessment feedback clips Control measure in large “ lively” groupsLecturer orientated/focusedIssues with file conversion

Semester BStudent orientated/focus

Gradually introduced to students during workshops over the semester....

Started by recording workshop discussion activity- voice only

Leading up to..... Formative assessment..

SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW

• Panel Interview for a Sport Management position of choice

• Group Work – 5 members allocated by Module Coordinator based upon attendance patterns

• 1 Interviewee & 4 Panel Members

• Academic content – leadership theory & management skills

FLIP CAMERA

• Students given option to rehearse interview role play 1 week in advance of summative assessment date.

• Groups were emailed video clip to view performance

• Although uptake was poor- only 2 groups opted

• Consent gained verbally from all members before hand

ASSESSMENT DAY LOGISTICS

• One group performed role play scenario whilst being video recorded and peer assessed by one other group.

• Both groups would agree a peer group mark before providing each other with verbal feedback.

• 126 students allocated into 25 groups of 5 (5x25)

• 19 groups were assessed and 14 recorded ....

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

– Positive feedback was received on lecturer allocation of grouping rather than peer group choices.

– Being videoed revealed differences in attitudes amongst students

– Some juggling of membership but largely group membership adhered to rigorously

– Some students were initially very uncomfortable in presence of camera but became less with more exposure

– Students displayed more professional behaviour patterns in diligence and performance

– Presented professionally- most made effort with dress & appearance

– Average mark higher than initial CW mean ( +6%)

– Novelty factor high

BENEFITS

• 95 students were formatively assessed in the space of 4 hours

• All were given peer group feedback which was agreed /moderated by the lecturer only at point of assessment but not via formal moderation process...

• Efficient & economical use of time for assessment & moderation

• High level of engagement with the assessment process

• Most students groups were accurate in their peer assessments *

• Although some were generous and unwilling to be critical of peers

OUTCOMES• Group CW Mean 47%

• + 7% difference from CW1* – CW2

• 57% increase in CW grade• 26% decrease in CW grade

• 14% (n=17) DNS CW 1• 17% (n=21) DNS CW 2

• (NB* CW1 1000wd individual essay)

OUTCOMES

Lessons Learnt

• More assistance needed with recording assessments.

• Timing- 15 mins allocated x 2 groups, most groups ran over- 30 min time slot in future.

• Issues with file conversion & studynet upload

• Some moderation could also be conducted

• Implement camera from first lecture onwards to increase familiarity.

• Peer group feedback was valuable learning tool

LESSONS LEARNT

• Although easy to use and to record learning events

• Subsequent utilisation and implementation still poses hurdles

• Conversion of media files to those supported by Studynet

• Gaining admin rights to the right software• Once media files uploaded- access depends on

individual student PC system configurations!

AREAS FOR CONCERN

REFERENCES

• Nicol, J & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2005) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. University of Strathclyde