1. Assessment and feedback
John Canning, LLAS Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, School of Humanities, University of Southampton
Life and Work in academia: an event for new lecturers,
12 April 2012
LLAS
Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies University of Southampton
Southampton, SO17 1BJ +44 (0) |

2. In small groups (10 minutes)
Why do we have assessment?
2. What are the weaknesses of assessment?

3. Why does assessment worry us?
Assessment of student learning as “the achilles’ heel of quality”
Peter T Knight (2002)
High-stakes summative assessment data, grades and degree classifications, are routinely mis-manipulated, tend to be unreliable, and give incomplete and uninformative pictures of student achievements (Knight 2002, p.107).

4. Good assessment (Race online)
Valid
Does it measure that which we are trying to measure?
Reliable
Is it consistent? It is fair?
Transparent
Do students know where the goalposts are?
Authentic
Are we assessing the students’ work or someone else's?
Plagiarism and academic integrity

5. A question
Assuming normal conditions, you are driving your car at a speed of 70 miles per hour (112 kph). What is the thinking distance plus the braking distance? Answers can be in metres, feet or car lengths.

6. What are we assessing? Deep learning Surface learning
Real understanding
Can we measure it though?
Surface learning
Sufficient to pass the exam, coursework etc.
Not understanding
Easy to measure?
Strategic learning
Students ‘choose’ between deep and surface learning
Deliberate surface learning

7. Hierarchy of the cognitive domain (Bloom’s taxonomy of education objectives)6
Evaluation
Ability to make a judgement of the worth of something 5
Synthesis
Ability to combine separate elements into a whole 4
Analysis
Ability to break problem into constituent parts and establish the relationships between each one 3
Application
Ability to apply rephrased knowledge in novel situation 2
Manipulation
Ability to rephrase knowledge 1
Knowledge
That which can be recalled
After Bloom 1956 (Brown 2001)

8. Biggs (1997, 1999) Structure of Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO)
Pre-structural
The task is not attacked appropriately 2
Uni-structural
One of a few aspects of the task picked up or used but understanding is nominal 3
Multi-structural
Several aspects of the task are learnt, but treated separately 4
Relational
The components are integrated into a coherent whole with each part contributing to the overall meaning 5
Extended abstract
The components are integrated and re-conceptualised, thereby creating an individual perspective
In Brown (2001)

9. Methods, sources and instruments of assessment (from Brown 2001)
Examples of methods
Examples of sources
Examples of instruments
Essays
Lecturer/ module coordinator
Implicit criteria
Oral presentations
Other tutors
Specific criteria
Cloze exercises
Marking schemes
Projects
Student peers¹
Broad criteria
¹NB: Peer assessment is a source, not a method

10. Feedback Often gets low scores on National Student Survey
Good feedback
Relevant
Timely
Meaningful
Makes suggestions for improvement
Feedback could be oral written or both. Use of new technology can be helpful (Brick 2009)

11. Other issues to consider
Time taken to assess and feedback
Disability and reasonable accommodations (SENDA 2001)
Under/over assessment of a module
Diversity of assessment over whole programme
Timing of assessments over the whole programme

12. Billy Brick (2009) How to provide student feedback using screen capture software
George Brown (2001) Assessment: a guide for lecturers (York: LTSN)
Peter T. Knight, “The Achilles' Heel of Quality: the assessment of student learning,” Quality in Higher Education 8, no. 1 (2002):  
Phil Race (online) Assessment, teaching and learning in higher education

13. Contact
LLAS Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies
University of Southampton
Highfield
Southampton
SO17 1BJ