Drs. Jessica Midraj and Sadiq Midraj Zayed University

Why are grades important? Learning is the most important goal in education. Educational assessment communicates to learners and other stakeholders how well students achieve the stated learning outcomes of a particular course/program. Grades are powerful and can be used for a multitude of purposes: curriculum and instruction development determine eligibility for scholarships for honors recognition into particular majors into graduate schools by future employers

Purpose To highlight ways in which programs can adhere to aspects of quality (validity, reliability, equity, etc.) assessment systems with multi-section courses and multiple teachers implementing common learning outcomes by drawing on research and practical experience from Zayed University’s setting to frame recommended assessment measures.

Samples of mulit-section course assessment procedures 1. University of Manitoba “all multi-sectioned courses are not necessarily identical in every aspect, nor should they be. There are always differences in teaching style and approaches to subject matter. Care should be taken, however, by Deans, Directors, Department Heads and Instructors to ensure that students do not receive significantly different treatment.” review of course outlines for comparability of material, assignments, assessments, and evaluation procedures contributing to the final grade review and approval of final grades prior to submission (University of Manitoba, 2008)

Samples of mulit-section course assessment procedures 2. University of Illinois: “To promote fairness and equality, the following conditions might be established ….” Similar number and type of grading components with equivalent content measured and level of difficulty Similar grading standards Consistent evaluation procedures (University of Illinois Center for Innovation in Teaching and Learning, 2009)

Samples of mulit-section course assessment procedures 3. Tulane University (School of Science and Engineering, Department of Math): “The general principle is that a multi-section course is considered as several sections of the same course.” A coordinator is assigned to each course. Instructors are permitted to have their “own way to approach the material” Final grades are decided by course instructors Common final exam worth at least 30% Common grading of the final exam (Tulane University Mathematics Department, 2011)

Samples of mulit-section course assessment procedures 4. University of Victoria (Mathematics and Statistics): “it is unfair for a class to be punished (or rewarded) as a result of the philosophy used when delivering the course.” Therefore, “we use the common final exam to determine what letter grades are given to students in a Section.” A quota system is used. For example: Based on the Section's performance on the common final exam, the Section is given a quota of each letter grade (e.g. 4 A+, 6 A, 5 A-, 9 B+, etc.). (University of Victoria Department of Mathematics and Statistics, n.d.)

Where are you? 1 Instructor Freedom 2 Recommended areas of consistency 3 Minimal % allocated for common assessments 4 Grades determined by common assessments

Where is ZU on the continuum? Program 1 (ABP) Approximately 80% of the grade is common All students need a minimum IELTS score Program 2 (COE)- 3 How did we get there?

ABP’s Background Foundation program’s purpose: to “bring students English language skills to a high level so that they can be successful when they enter University College and the baccalaureate program” and “develop students' academic skills, increase their ability to use and incorporate technology in their learning and widen their general knowledge base” Courses Four 20-hour/week semester length courses- High Beginner Low Intermediate Intermediate High Intermediate All multi-section courses operating on two campuses

Program Development Cycle ABP Vision and Mission Curriculum and Teaching Philosophy Assessment Philosophy and Structure Internal Review and Revision External Review and Revision ImplementationSystematic Review

Program 1 (ABP)-Questions asked How can we ensure that the grades that students earn are valid and reliable across common courses? How can we build an assessment system that treats learners fairly? In other words, how can we ensure that the student who earns an “S” in Teacher X’s class would also earn an “S” in Teacher Y’s class for producing the same level of work.

Assessment Philosophy and Structure A-Develop a philosophy of assessment Based on curricular outcomes Essential components of our educational assessment system are purposeful and robust fair and transparent practical provide an appropriate balance of assessment practices that yields the most valid and reliable information about students’ learning have a positive washback into the classroom

Assessment Philosophy and Structure B-Develop overall assessment structure considering types, weighting, etc. Common Core(Level Determined) 35% Listening (9%) Reading (9%) Writing (9%) Integrated-skills project (8%) Coursework Core(Teacher Determined) 20% Speaking (5%) Vocabulary (5%) Grammar (5%) Other Assignments (5%) Final Exams 45% Accuracy (6%) Listening (13%) Reading (13%) Writing (13%)

Assessment Philosophy and Structure C-Develop the procedures for common assessment construction and development New assessment created using specificationsNew assessment piloted/reviewed by level New assessment modified & prepared for live administration

Assessment Philosophy and Structure Assessment administered Statistics/feedback reviewed Official scores released Assessment reviewed & revised based on curriculum/feedback/statistics Level Coordinators/Assessment Team review Assessment prepared for administration

Assessment Philosophy and Structure D-Monitor assessment system feedback from faculty, administration, and students data from database creation of assessment handbooks yearly

Program 2 - COE Assignments Gradi ng Syste m Learning Outcomes Course LOs MALO s ZULOs NAEYC TESOL Assignment 1: Midterm 20%1, 2, 3PK 4b, 5a 1b1 Assignment 2: Case Study 20%3, 4PK CTQR 3b, 4d 1b1, 3c1, 4a2 Assignment 3: Portfolio & Journal Entries 20%2, 3CR 5a3b2, 3c1 Assignment 4: In Class (Presentation; and specific tasks) 15%2, 3CR 5a1b1, 3b2, 3c1, 4a2 Assignment 5: Final 25%1, 2, 3PK 3a, 4b, 4c, 5a 1b1

Discussion different ways to structure assessment systems role of assessment in ensuring common learning outcomes are met impact of structured assessment systems

Conclusion & Recommendations Adopt a theoretical assessment framework based reputable and contextually relevant practices. Create effective educational assessment systems that are research-based-- valid, reliable, appropriate, pragmatic, transparent, coherent, comprehensive, and continuous. Align assessment to international, national, institutional, and program standards and learning outcomes. Plan an ongoing assessment review cycle: “When grading policies and practices are carefully formulated and reviewed periodically, they can serve well the many purposes for which they are used.” (University of Illinois Center for Innovation in Teaching and Learning, 2009)

Selected Bibliography Inbar-Lourie, O. (2008). Constructing a language assessment knowledge base: A focus on language assessment courses. Language Testing, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp Kabouridis, G. & and Link, D. (2001). Quality assessment of continuing education short courses. Quality Assurance in Education, ISSN , Volume 9, Issue 2, pp. 103 – 109. National Research Council. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Tulane University Mathematics Department. (2011). Multi-Section Courses. Retrieved March 10, 2015, from University of Illinois Center for Innovation in Teaching and Learning. (2009). Assigning Course Grades. Retrieved March 10, 2015, from University of Manitoba. (2008, January 1). Governing Documents: Academic. Policy: Multi-sectioned courses. Retrieved March 10, 2015, from University of Victoria Department of Mathematics and Statistics (n.d.). Multi- Section Grading Policy. Retrieved March 10, 2015, from