Assessment and Feedback

Serena BuftonFaculty Teaching Fellow

Planning Context

• SHU Assessment and Feedback Policy (April 2008)

• D&S Feedback Policy (July 2010)• SHU new Standard Assessment Regulations

and Assessment Improvement Precepts (October 2010).

Faculty Feedback Policy

• Draws on SHU Assessment and Feedback Policy (‘assessment for learning’) and Faculty priorities.

• Emphasises the importance of formative feedback in module and course design and supportive summative feedback for all assessments.

• Has implications for assessment design: a more incremental approach in which students build up towards the assessment task, getting feedback on the way?

SHU Assessment Improvement Precepts

• Two assessment models:– Model A: a maximum of 6 tasks per module; up to

3 is the preferred number; pass or fail overall (not all tasks necessarily need to be passed).

– Model B: a maximum of 3 tasks per module; 2 is the preferred number; all tasks must be passed.

• Model A is the default model: modules being validated for 2011/12 will only be allowed Model B status in a few contexts.

Conditions for Model B

• Professional Body requirements.• ‘subject discipline and/or legislative requirements

(eg health and safety) which generally can be evidenced and which would damage the employability of students if they were not recognised’

• Applications for Model B assessment have to be approved by the Faculty Implementation Team before validation and agreed by the Secretary and Registrar. ‘Case law’ will be established.

Implications for Course Planning

• If Model B is being planned, there needs to be a rationale and evidence to support this as early as possible so that agreement can be sought.

• In the case of Model A, the implications for module design and assessment strategy need careful planning, especially the relationship between assessment tasks and learning outcomes.

Learning Outcomes (LOs)

• These should cover knowledge and understanding, intellectual skills, subject-specific skills and key skills (QAA).

• Subject Benchmark Statements identify discipline-specific LOs.

• Existing SHU advice (LTI ‘Guides’) imply a firm link between LOs and assessment tasks.

• Custom and practice may therefore be that LOs are attached to tasks rather than to the module as a whole.

• The University’s current position is that all LOs have to be passed.

Implications for Assessment Design

• Under Model B, as all tasks have to be passed, this is not a problem.

• Under Model A, students passing a module overall may not meet all the learning outcomes.

• How therefore can assessment design under Model A ensure that all LOs are met?

• Advice has been repeatedly requested from the University. In the meantime, some suggestions:

Designing assessment for Model A• Learning outcomes are achieved at the completion

of the module: ‘By the end of the module, students will be able to...’

• The logical implications of this are either:– end-loading the assessment: one (or more) task at the

end of the module (not ideal) OR

– designing each assessment task in such a way that it covers all the learning outcomes (over-assessment?) OR

– Writing very general learning outcomes (how are these different, then, to aims and objectives?).

Could we do something more pedagogically sound?

For example:• Weight the assessment tasks so that students have

to pass the last task in order to pass the module overall (eg a 30%/70% split); the last task covers all the Los. In addition:

• Break each learning outcome into its constituent parts and assess these on a cumulative basis (staged assessment tasks: low stakes summative mark plus formative feedback for the next task).

• Any other suggestions?

Things to think about

• Designing the assessment and feedback strategy and course content concurrently.

• Thinking about ways of maximising formative feedback.

• Looking early on at the balance of assessment activities across and between levels of study.

• Presenting a case for Model B as soon as possible if this is being planned in.

How we can help

• We have no answers; there are no prescribed ways of responding to the University and Faculty ‘givens’ in assessment design.

• Our role is to support you.• We can make suggestions and work with individuals

and teams as they plan their modules and courses.• We will also maintain pressure to get more

information and guidance from the University and pass this on to course planning teams.