Engendering student learning by use of specific assessment strategies

by

Dr D J Hargreaves

School of Mechanical, Manufacturing and Medical Engineering
Queensland University of Technology

 

The Impact of Assessment on Learning

All assessment practices reflect a number of assumptions relating to the nature of learning and the purpose of assessment. If educational institutions intend to equip graduates with attributes necessary for professional practice, for example critical thinking and lifelong learning capabilities, then current assessment practices must be examined. Teaching, learning and assessment are inextricably linked and assessment is the most significant motivator for learning.

Assessment always leads to learning of some kind, but so often it is not what we desire. Assessment is vitally important to students and exerts a major influence on their approach to learning. Assessment procedures should therefore promote and reward the achievement of desired learning outcomes.

Ramsden (1992) identifies the link between different ways of thinking about assessment and the quality of student learning. He sees the conventional view of assessment - that is, primarily as a way of assigning grades - as instrumental in the development of students' "cynical and negative attitudes towards the subject matter and superficial approaches to studying it - an optimal recipe for surface learners". Further, Ramsden (1992) believes that "our choice of assessment methods should be conditioned by our goals for student learning" and that we should think of assessment "less as a means of getting a single score for comparative purposes, and more as a means of providing opportunities for students to demonstrate how much they understand". Boud (1995) summarises the connections between assessment and learning as:

Boud (1995) also indicates that assessment for certification has been given greater attention than assessment to aid learning and it has been assumed that assessment measures learning, but does not influence it.

Assessment shapes student learning in both positive and negative directions. At worst, assessment methods force students into surface learning; facts are quickly acquired to meet examination pressures and just as quickly forgotten. At best, assessment methods provide students with opportunities to apply their newly acquired knowledge to real and challenging problems, and hence with the chance to learn in depth and test the limits of their understanding.

Hargreaves and Wallis (1993) found that current assessment practices indicate to students that their success depends not on 'how well' they have learned but rather 'how much', that is, the development of quantitative rather than qualitative concepts of learning is encouraged. This leads to surface rather than deep learning approaches. Marton and Saljo (1976) and others have found that students who generally favour deep approaches tend to adopt surface approaches if assessment processes appear to demand them.

There is no doubt, therefore, that assessment methods can significantly influence the learning approach adopted by students and hence the desired outcome of an educational process. Assessment methods should therefore be used to measure what students can do with what they know, rather than what they know.

 

Improving Learning through Assessment Initiatives

McDowell (1995) reports on five innovative assessment methods; self-marking, self- and peer-marking, group presentations, a group task with peer assessment and open-book examinations. Generally, those students who experienced these methods recognised them as positive and did not wish to revert to more conventional methods.

Members of the academic staff of Queensland University of Technology have, in recent years, established a collaborative network of special interest groups with a common desire to foster excellence in many areas of teaching and learning. These are known as the TRAC (Teaching Reflection and Collaboration) groups, and are organised and sustained by staff members with the support of ASDU (Academic Staff Development Unit) members. One of these groups is a RAIL (Role of Assessment in Learning) group. The mission of RAIL is

Assessment methods are pivotal in the development of student' learning strategies and, if used creatively and appropriately, assessment can be a valuable method to promote student's use of deeper learning strategies.

RAIL is made up of staff from six schools. Members undertook action research projects with the aim of improving student learning by implementing specific and innovative assessment techniques.

A number of innovative approaches to assessment have been implemented at Queensland University of Technology. This paper describes initiatives such as student-generated examinations and active participation in tutorials sessions.

 

Student-generated examinations

It is a well-known dictum that the best way to establish whether you know something is to try to teach it to someone else. On a similar basis, students could easily demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of a topic by undertaking an assignment to set an examination question with the accompanying solution. In the School of Mechanical, Manufacturing and Medical Engineering, students are normally given a mid-semester test as part of their assessment for individual course units. The second- and fourth- year students were given the option of sitting for a prescribed mid-semester test (lecturer sets questions, specific number to be answered in a prescribed time) or devising an equivalent examination question and submitting it, together with its solution; both forms of test to be at the same time.

The students who undertook the assignment were surveyed in order to identify and examine their perceptions of the learning benefits and their motivation in doing this form of assessment. About one-half of each group felt that they did not work well under examination conditions and preferred to work at home. About one-quarter of each group felt that they could learn more by setting an equivalent examination question.

Every student who undertook the equivalent examination question (assignment) felt that they had learnt a lot more about the topic than if they simply sat for a test. They also felt that they would have to spend less time in revision for this topic in preparation for the end-of-semester examinations. The only disincentive of this system was the enormous increase in time required for marking the individual assignments.

A similar exercise was carried out in the School of Life Science. Students were not given the choice of whether to do the assignment, but were given a choice of topic in microbiology. Students were encouraged to check their assignment with the lecturer before final submission. As these were first-year students, they were given sample questions to clarify the type and level of question required. Students were surveyed in relation to their learning styles (surface and deep) and the type of learning adopted to do the assignment. Their opinions were also sought on the usefulness of this approach and whether they could suggest any improvements. Most students found that this was a learning method that they had not encountered previously, but were comfortable with it. There was some concern that the choice of topic was too wide and so their particular topic might not be included in the final examination.

The exercise clearly indicated that students can be successfully encouraged to participate more deeply in a process of constructing their knowledge, even for a first year science unit. Student expectations were to learn by repetition, but nearly all found the assignment rewarding in a learning sense. The difference in student attitude was observable and encouraging. Details of this approach to assessment can be found in Hargreaves and Hargreaves (1995).

 

The Tutorial Strategy

In the author's subject - a year 2 semester 2 Fluids subject - ten percent of the total assessment for the whole course unit is allocated to tutorial work. In order to cater for students who are unable, for various legitimate reasons, to attend the tutorials, students are given the option of undertaking what amounts to fairly structured tutorial sessions or writing an assignment in their own time. The majority of students (approx. 85%) choose to attend the tutorial sessions. Assessment for the tutorial sessions comprises six marks for attendance over the semester. A further four marks are allocated to the individual presentation. Over the semester, every student presents one solution. Some students request to present more than once.

For the tutorial sessions, the class of about 150 students is divided into four groups with each group assigned to a tutorial room together with a tutor. Each group is then further divided into four groups with each group of about ten students being asked to sit together in a round table type arrangement. The four groups are given a subject related problem which they are expected to discuss within the group and arrive at a common solution. The groups are allotted approximately 30 minutes to complete this task. One member of each group is then asked to explain the problem and its solution to the whole room. Five minutes are allocated to this exercise.

At the end of semester examinations, overall results were examined to establish whether there was any difference between those who attended tutorial sessions and those students who opted for the assignment. The average mark for those who chose to follow the structured tutorial approach was eight percent higher than those who submitted an assignment written in their own time.

A survey of students was carried out to obtain feedback on student perceptions of the tutorial structure, especially in terms of learning and understanding of subject material. Table 1 summarises the results.

  %Yes
1. Did the compulsory group attendance (that is, marks for attendance and the individual seminar)  
- enhance group discussion? 66
- improve your study methods? 61
- encourage you to work through the tutorial material provided in the course unit outline? 85
- provide the catalyst to increase your study of the overall unit? 73
2. Did the individual seminar provide the incentive to ensure that you were conversant with the work being covered weekly? 71
3. Do you feel that you learned more of the subject material with this tutorial arrangement? 77
4. Did you find that groups of 10 rather than a room of 40 students;  
- enhanced your communication skills? 74
- facilitated your learning? 80
5. Do you think this tutorial arrangement should be used again? 88
6. Do you have any comments generally or suggestions for improving this arrangement? N/A

Table 1 Results of survey regarding the tutorial strategy
.

Question 6 of the survey provoked 56% of the students to respond. Some of the comments are:

The most common negative comment related to the lack of time for individual tutoring. Students felt that the role of the tutor should have been to solve the problems, that is to show the class how to do it, which they could then learn. Some students felt that the tutorials were time consuming. The intention was for students to work as a group, either in or outside the actual tutorial session, but those students making this claim felt that their time could be better spent by the tutor "telling us the answer". The groups of ten were felt by some to be too large. The oral presentation was felt by some as "useless" and put extra stress on students.

The success of this strategy in semester 2 of 1997 was evident enough to repeat it for semester 1 1998 with second year students in another Fluids class. The results showed that student support again was very positive.

 

Conclusions

Two strategies aimed at actively involving students in their learning process were adopted in classes of about 140 students. One approach involved structured tutorial sessions in which groups of about 10 students work together to solve a given problem and then one of them presents the solution to the whole class. The second approach allowed students the freedom to generate equivalent examination questions together with the solution instead of undertaking a formal mid-semester test. In each case, it was clear that the mode of assessment positively influenced student learning.

These approaches also assisted in the development of generic attributes such as communication, problem solving, teamwork and critical thinking.

 

References

Boud D (1995): Ensuring that assessment contributes to learning, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Problem Based Learning in Higher Education, University of Linkoping, Sweden, pp13-20

Hargreaves DJ and Hargreaves MH (1995): Assessment for learning, in Proceedings of the 7th Australasian Association for Engineering Education, Sydney, pp131-135.

Hargreaves DJ & Wallis EJ (1993): How students learn and why they adopt certain learning approaches, in: Proceedings of the 6th Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference, Sydney, pp601-606.

Hargreaves MH (editor) (1997): The Role of Assessment in Learning, ASDU Issues, Queensland University of Technology,

Marton F& Saljo R (1976): On qualitative differences in learning 1 - outcome and process, British Journal of Education Psychology, 46, pp 4-11

McDowell L (1995): The impact of innovative assessment on student learning, Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, p302.

Ramsden P (1992): Learning to Teach in Higher Education (London, Routledge).

 

Conference Entry Page About the Conference Abstracts Conference Program

TEDI Home About Assessment UQ Home

This site built on a Macintosh using Dreamweaver.. Last modified 20/1/99; 10:14:19 AM.