eAssessment: Who's Involved?
1
eAssessment: Who’s involved? The Business School, Bournemouth University Lianne Hutchings, Programme Administrator [email protected] David Hopkins, Learning Technologist The Business School, Bournemouth University So there are tutors and students, but who else? How does a manual key quality process shift into the e- environment? We work through the assessment lifecycle of a unit [email protected] ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION Units are typically defined as having the following Assignment mix: • Report, Case Study, Essay • Collaboration (e.g. Wiki) • Reflection (e.g. Blog) • Test / MCQ • Portfolio software (Turnitin) to aid the marking and feedback processes. Currently students are not offered the ability to review the Originality Report due to the amount of training required to instruct them on how to read the report correctly. from creation of the assessments themselves, along with maintenance of quality processes and procedures, through to the methods and practices for ease of submission, and onto marking, feedback, resubmissions and successful completion. Key aspirations combine preservation of quality educational standards, security of paperwork and efficacy of functionality whilst aiming to prevent additional workload falling on either tutors or students. • 100% Coursework, • 100% TCP (Time-Constrained Paper), or • 50% Coursework / 50% TCP Assignments are created based on the Intended Learning Outcomes required for the Unit subject or discipline, and can take the form of: • Portfolio Assignments that take the form of a report, essay, or case study are submitted using either the VLE assignment submission or Turnitin plagiarism detection/deterrent tool(s). Where we are able to, and according to the assignment type , we use plagiarism detection & deterrent to read the report correctly. Based on a small pilot study that took place in early 2011, future developments of eAssessment and online submission will involve careful consideration of the possibilities added by technological advances in areas of online submission, plagiarism detection and deterrence, along with a clear indication to students of benefits of usage. prevent additional workload falling on either tutors or students. STAKEHOLDERS ACADEMIC OFFENCES PANEL PREPARATION ASSIGNMENT MARKING & FEEDBACK KEY: Important/essential stakeholder to the process. Engaged but not essential stakeholder to the process. PROGRAMME LEADER LEARNING TECHNOLOGIST ASSESSMENT PASSED Student proceeds to next Unit & Assessment ASSESSMENT FAILED Student completes the ADMINISTRATOR STUDENT Student completes the Resubmission Assignment REASSESSMENT FAILED Student repeats the Unit with next Student Cohort g marks dback ACADEMIC / TUTOR 2 ND MARKER MARKING & 2 ND MARKING Methods of marking in the online environment have often been determined by the type of submission (coursework vs. exam/TCP) and the type of tool used for submission. Experimentation and approaches have developed with prime consideration given to tutor choice. Consideration is given to requirements to print work, format of feedback (annotation within Displaying & feed EXTERNAL EXAMINER VIEW RATION OVAL G TO VLE SSION ANCE ENT BRIEF NMENT SSION AL ISSUES ATING STANCES MISSION NLOAD EMENTS ECTRONIC RAGE KING ARKING MIC PANEL OARD MISSION CTIONS LECTRONIC OF FEEDBACK requirements to print work, format of feedback (annotation within assignment, written or electronic/video feedback, summary paragraph, etc), and the breakdown and recording of marks where there are sub-elements. It is essential to preserve the sequence for marking, 2 nd marking and external examiner approval to ensure the marking policies are adhered to (e.g. marks not displayed before 2 nd marking complete). Further development is required to fine-tune these processes and will be based on a coherent marking and feedback structure to www.bournemouth.ac.uk OVERV PREPAR APPRO LOADING SUBMIS GUIDA ASSIGNME ASSIGN SUBMIS TECHNICA MITIGA CIRCUMS LATE SUBM DOWN ASSIGNE SECURE ELE STOR MARK 2 ND MA ACADEM OFFENCES P EXAM BO RESUBM INSTRUC SECURE EL STORAGE O will be based on a coherent marking and feedback structure to standardise processes, maintain quality standards and maximise the student experience.
-
Upload
david-hopkins -
Category
Education
-
view
927 -
download
2
description
So there are tutors and students, but who else? How does a manual key quality process shift into the e-environment? We work through the assessment lifecycle of a unit from creation of the assessments themselves, along with maintenance of quality processes and procedures, through to the methods and practices for ease of submission, and onto marking, feedback, resubmissions and successful completion. Key aspirations combine preservation of quality educational standards, security of paperwork and efficacy of functionality whilst aiming to prevent additional workload falling on either tutors or students.
Transcript of eAssessment: Who's Involved?
eAssessment: Who’s involved?The Business School, Bournemouth University
Lianne Hutchings, Programme Administrator
David Hopkins, Learning Technologist
The Business School, Bournemouth University
So there are tutors and students, but who else?
How does a manual key quality process shift into the e-
environment? We work through the assessment lifecycle of a unit
David Hopkins, Learning Technologist
ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION
Units are typically defined as having the following
Assignment mix:
• Report, Case Study, Essay
• Collaboration (e.g. Wiki)
• Reflection (e.g. Blog)
• Test / MCQ
• Portfolio
software (Turnitin) to aid the marking and feedback
processes. Currently students are not offered the
ability to review the Originality Report due to the
amount of training required to instruct them on how
to read the report correctly. from creation of the assessments themselves, along with
maintenance of quality processes and procedures, through to the
methods and practices for ease of submission, and onto marking,
feedback, resubmissions and successful completion. Key
aspirations combine preservation of quality educational standards,
security of paperwork and efficacy of functionality whilst aiming to
prevent additional workload falling on either tutors or students.
Assignment mix:
• 100% Coursework,
• 100% TCP (Time-Constrained Paper), or
• 50% Coursework / 50% TCP
Assignments are created based on the Intended
Learning Outcomes required for the Unit subject or
discipline, and can take the form of:
• Portfolio
Assignments that take the form of a report, essay, or
case study are submitted using either the VLE
assignment submission or Turnitin plagiarism
detection/deterrent tool(s).
Where we are able to, and according to the assignment
type , we use plagiarism detection & deterrent
to read the report correctly.
Based on a small pilot study that took place in early
2011, future developments of eAssessment and online
submission will involve careful consideration of the
possibilities added by technological advances in areas
of online submission, plagiarism detection and
deterrence, along with a clear indication to students of
benefits of usage.
prevent additional workload falling on either tutors or students.
STAKEHOLDERS
ACADEMIC OFFENCES
PANEL
PREPARATION ASSIGNMENT MARKING & FEEDBACK KEY:Important/essential stakeholder
to the process.
Engaged but not essential
stakeholder to the process.
PROGRAMME LEADER
LEARNING TECHNOLOGIST
ASSESSMENT PASSED
Student proceeds to next
Unit & Assessment
ASSESSMENT FAILED
Student completes the
ADMINISTRATOR
STUDENT
Student completes the
Resubmission Assignment
REASSESSMENT FAILED
Student repeats the Unit
with next Student Cohort
Dis
pla
yin
g m
ark
s
& f
ee
db
ack
ACADEMIC / TUTOR
2ND MARKER
MARKING & 2ND MARKING
Methods of marking in the online environment have often been
determined by the type of submission (coursework vs.
exam/TCP) and the type of tool used for submission.
Experimentation and approaches have developed with prime
consideration given to tutor choice. Consideration is given to
requirements to print work, format of feedback (annotation within
Dis
pla
yin
g m
ark
s
& f
ee
db
ack
EXTERNAL EXAMINER
OV
ER
VIE
W
PR
EP
AR
AT
ION
AP
PR
OV
AL
LOA
DIN
G T
O V
LE
SU
BM
ISS
ION
GU
IDA
NC
E
AS
SIG
NM
EN
T B
RIE
F
AS
SIG
NM
EN
T
SU
BM
ISS
ION
TE
CH
NIC
AL
ISS
UE
S
MIT
IGA
TIN
G
CIR
CU
MS
TAN
CE
S
LAT
E S
UB
MIS
SIO
N
DO
WN
LOA
D
AS
SIG
NE
ME
NT
S
SE
CU
RE
ELE
CT
RO
NIC
ST
OR
AG
E
MA
RK
ING
MA
RK
ING
AC
AD
EM
IC
OF
FE
NC
ES
PA
NE
L
EX
AM
BO
AR
D
RE
SU
BM
ISS
ION
INS
TR
UC
TIO
NS
SE
CU
RE
ELE
CT
RO
NIC
ST
OR
AG
E O
F F
EE
DB
AC
K
requirements to print work, format of feedback (annotation within
assignment, written or electronic/video feedback, summary
paragraph, etc), and the breakdown and recording of marks where
there are sub-elements.
It is essential to preserve the sequence for marking, 2nd marking
and external examiner approval to ensure the marking policies are
adhered to (e.g. marks not displayed before 2nd marking complete).
Further development is required to fine-tune these processes and
will be based on a coherent marking and feedback structure to
www.bournemouth.ac.uk
OV
ER
VIE
W
PR
EP
AR
AT
ION
AP
PR
OV
AL
LOA
DIN
G T
O V
LE
SU
BM
ISS
ION
GU
IDA
NC
E
AS
SIG
NM
EN
T B
RIE
F
AS
SIG
NM
EN
T
SU
BM
ISS
ION
TE
CH
NIC
AL
ISS
UE
S
MIT
IGA
TIN
G
CIR
CU
MS
TAN
CE
S
LAT
E S
UB
MIS
SIO
N
DO
WN
LOA
D
AS
SIG
NE
ME
NT
S
SE
CU
RE
ELE
CT
RO
NIC
ST
OR
AG
E
MA
RK
ING
2N
DM
AR
KIN
G
AC
AD
EM
IC
OF
FE
NC
ES
PA
NE
L
EX
AM
BO
AR
D
RE
SU
BM
ISS
ION
INS
TR
UC
TIO
NS
SE
CU
RE
ELE
CT
RO
NIC
ST
OR
AG
E O
F F
EE
DB
AC
Kwill be based on a coherent marking and feedback structure to
standardise processes, maintain quality standards and maximise the
student experience.
