SETU and units

Requirements for completing the assessment tasks in this unit were clear

Assessment is a powerful tool for guiding student study habits by strategically indicating what is valued and its comparative worth. Academic staff and students often view assessment from opposite positions - for academic staff, consideration on what to assess and how are often the last steps in the planning of the curriculum and learning environment; while for students assessment details are often the first point of reference for planning their approach to study for a unit (James, McInnis & Devlin, 2002). As part of a large Australian Universities Teaching Committee (AUTC) investigation of assessment practices in Australian universities, the following 16 indicators of effective assessment in higher education were identified:

1. Assessment is treated by staff and students as an integral and prominent component of the entire teaching and learning process rather than a final adjunct to it.
2. The multiple roles of assessment are recognised. The powerful motivating effect of assessment requirements on students is understood and assessment tasks are designed to foster valued study habits.
3. There is a faculty/departmental policy that guides individuals' assessment practices. Subject assessment is integrated into an overall plan for course assessment.
4. There is a clear alignment between expected learning outcomes, what is taught and learnt, and the knowledge and skills assessed - there is a closed and coherent 'curriculum loop'.
5. Assessment tasks assess the capacity to analyse and synthesis new information and concepts rather than simply recall information previously presented.
6. A variety of assessment methods is employed so that the limitations of particular methods are minimised.
7. Assessment tasks are designed to assess relevant generic skills as well as subject-specific knowledge and skills.
8. There is a steady progression in the complexity and demands of assessment requirements in the later years of courses.
9. There is provision for student choice in assessment tasks and weighting at certain times.
10. Student and staff workloads are considered in the scheduling and design of assessment tasks.
11. Excessive assessment is avoided. Assessment tasks are designed to sample student learning.
12. Assessment tasks are weighted to balance the developmental ('formative') and judgemental ('summative') roles of assessment. Early low-stakes, low-weight assessment is used to provide students with feedback.
13. Grades are calculated and reported on the basis of clearly articulated learning outcomes and criteria for levels of achievement.
14. Students receive explanatory and diagnostic feedback as well as grades.
15. Assessment tasks are checked to ensure there are no inherent biases that may disadvantage particular student groups.
16. Plagiarism is minimised through careful task design, explicit education and appropriate monitoring of academic honesty.

(James et al., 2002)

These indicators highlight a number of aspects relating to 'clarity of requirements' for assessment. If the Faculty and/or School has general guidelines covering assessment-related matters, such as late penalties, requests for extension, plagiarism, etc., then students should be informed that these exist, shown where to find them and given an explanation of their meaning. Such general guidelines should be applied consistently and equitably, so that students appreciate that they are more than rhetorical threats. At the unit level, adequate information about the requirements for each individual assignment should be provided to students. This should encompass both the task requirements (what students are being asked to do) and the criteria their submission will be judged against (how they will be marked). Students shouldn't be left to guess or infer the marking criteria - the flip-side to this is that when the marking criteria are provided to students, there can be little argument/misunderstanding about marks received. The provision of a model assignment submission is likely to assist students to understand the format and depth of submission required, as well as reduce their questions to you about the assignment.

If, in addition to unit-specific knowledge and skills, an assignment relies on particular generic skills (such as research, citing and referencing, oral presentation, etc.), then these generic requirements should be made explicit. If an assignment contains optional elements, sufficient information should be available such that students can make informed choices amongst the options, and the marking criteria should be structured so that all options are equitable in effort required and marks achievable. Assignment instructions given in 'plain English' may still be confusing to students for whom English is not their first language - be careful of using words that have multiple literal interpretations (such as 'nature'), and of using idioms whose meaning may not be self-evident to all students (such as 'the acid test' or 'as long as'). Any 'non-standard' marking criteria should be explained clearly, i.e. if a pass mark is something other than 50 percent, if specific assessment elements must be completed satisfactorily in addition to achieving a satisfactory aggregate mark, etc. Specific types of assessment will probably require additional information/explanation, for example online assessment, group work, laboratory work, etc.

Activity

Consider a unit that you contribute to. Consider the various items of assessment for that unit. Are all of the presentation/formatting, presumed prior knowledge and skills, marking criteria, and other requirements for each assessment task clearly identified in the unit guide? Are there any improvements that could be made that would clarify the assessment requirements?

Forward to: The teaching staff gave me helpful feedback