Case Study 3
Assessing Learning and Exchanging Feedback
Contextual Background
Once again, the context is Pre-sessional English, and this year there are major changes to the programme: I am due to be tutor for a course of only seven weeks in duration.
Evaluation
The last few years I have taught on the 13-week Pre-sessional courses, which have a 4-week formative stage, followed by a 9-week summative stage, with some formative assessment in the early weeks of the latter. It is a ‘high stakes’ environment, as students who don’t achieve the required grades will not be able to progress onto their chosen main course (Foundation, Undergraduate or Postgraduate). Due to this year’s new structure (which, I believe, brings us more in line with other universities), I will only have 7 weeks to get to know my students and their needs, and move them far enough forward so that they can progress. This will necessitate effective assessment of their work and for feedback to be rapid.
Moving Forwards
In preparation for a recent Workshop I read Phil Race’s thoughts on self, peer and group assessment, and herein may lie an approach to this challenge. Race does acknowledge that there are occasions when there is “no substitute for tutor assessment” (2001, p. 11), and I certainly wouldn’t seek an alternative in which I didn’t play a vital role. It is also important to point out that equipping students with what they need in order to assess themselves and their peers is no small task. Essential to this is the clarity of the assessment criteria, in its wording and how the tutor guides their students in applying it. Taking a longer view, this is worth pursuing as it creates greater student autonomy: Barrow sees this as a legacy from the Enlightenment that HE has inherited (2006, pp. 359-60), and goes on to add:
As the student advances through the education system, he or she is increasingly expected to have the ability to measure his or her own work against the standards that have been inculcated by the teacher, and to judge him- or herself against those standards.
(p. 361)
Whilst not achievable within 7 weeks, we can still get students started along this path, so let’s propose a first step. Race believes that having completed a task, a student can gain much from comparing how two or three other students approached it (p. 6). The possibilities as I see it include:
- students being able to make a more objective judgement on a work that is not their own (p. 6), hence training them to use criteria that they will then be able to later direct at their work;
- when discussing strengths and weaknesses with peers it occurs to me that students may feel more free to challenge the views of their peers than they would of their teachers, therefore providing a space for a deeper level of discussion, and a platform for students to support their ideas;
- seeing what ideas, examples, etc. other students had can nudge them into considering more possibilities in future tasks.
I propose trialling this approach, supported by aiding students in their understanding of assessment criteria. A second step could be students stating how this impacts their self-assessment. Whilst persuaded of the benefits, prudence suggests trialling these ideas initially in the context of formative assessment.
550 words
References
Barrow, M. (2006) ‘Assessment and student transformation: linking character and intellect’, Studies in Higher Education, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 357-372.
Race, P. (2001) A Briefing on Self, Peer and Group Assessment, York: LTSN Generic Centre. Available at: https://phil-race.co.uk/download/5647/ (Accessed 28 February 2024).