|
Description
Peter told us about two of his assessment procedures.
Peter uses an interactive graph to ensure that learning objectives – within the course (SVY1110 – Introduction to GPS) and within each assessment task – are clearly and accurately mapped to the assessment scheme used.
Students on the Geodetic Surveying A (SVY2106) course submit their work (consisting of measured angles and calculations based on these) via a spreadsheet. Peter has developed a series of macros, through which he runs student figures, ie their raw data and the calculations, which help him to mark quickly and effectively.
Learning goals and objectives
Peter noticed that there are often discrepancies between weighting of assessments within modules and the stated course objectives, so he decided to develop a strong relationship between the learning objectives on his course and the weighting given to each module or section of the course he is teaching. He did this by creating an interactive graph which maps the assignments against both the objectives and individual modules. This graph checks the figures and if the module weighting is not accurately reflected in the assessment, the graph shows this in red. In this way, Peter can be certain that he is setting correctly weighted assignments. He also encourages students to read the learning objectives of each assessment task, by pointing out the different weightings of each objectives and how they relate to one another – for example, if one part of the task is worth 5% and another is worth 30% in the assessment scheme, this gives the students an idea of the relative amount of time they should spend on each part.
The macros within the spreadsheets Peter uses highlight any individual figures that are incorrect. If one figure is wrong, it will throw off the entire piece of work thereafter, meaning that a student might submit a piece of work with all the figures wrong, but have made only one mistake. Peter's macro allows him to replace the incorrect figure in order to check that the rest of the observations and calculations are correct, so that rather than return a piece of work marked simply as being wrong, he can show the student exactly where the mistake was made and whether or not they carried on correctly from there. To do this manually would have been prohibitively time-consuming for Peter.The students are then given a completed marking sheet (of which a copy is included in the course book). The marking sheet dissects the elements of the assignment and shows the students the specific areas where mistakes were made – this is automatically generated from the spreadsheets.
Target audience
1) Students on the course SVY 1110 (Introduction to GPS). There are about 120 off-campus students and about 25 on campus.
2) SVY 2106 (Geodetic Surveying A). There are about 50 off-campus and 10 on-campus students in this course.
Informing students
Both schemes are designed to help with this, by informing students more accurately about the issues of learning goals and assessment procedures and how they relate to each other, and produce more helpful feedback. Students are encouraged to read the learning objectives and to ask questions if anything seems unclear.
Feedback
Peter makes sure that he does marking on time. He's careful never to mark something simply as being wrong, but shows where the error was made. If a student gives a good answer, Peter may add some extra information, so that the better students are also gaining from feedback. The spreadsheets Peter uses are designed to cut down turnaround time as well as to provide better feedback.
Roles
Peter designed the course and the interactive graph, and co-designed the spreadsheets with a former colleague, Ivan Wolksi. It's been an ongoing process over three years. Putting together the interactive graph and the macros within the spreadsheets was time-consuming, but now they are done they can be re-used with different data for as long as Peter needs them.
Moderation processes
Everything on Peter's courses is moderated from within the Faculty and within the discipline, from the introductory book, through all the assessments and including the exam.
Results
The interactive graph achieves exactly what Peter designed it to do and has helped him to design fair assessment schemes that accurately reflect the learning objectives.
Another benefit from the spreadsheet macros is that they include checks and balances to ensure students cannot fudge, invent or copy their figures. It would take longer for a student to produce ‘faked' work than to do it properly.
Problems and advice for others
Sometimes students don't follow the instructions properly and this can cause some formatting problems, so Peter is working on how to clarify the instructions. Setting up these schemes has been time-consuming, but Peter feels it was time well spent.
Additional comments
Peter believes that universities should make a more explicit link between graduate qualities and assessment schemes. In particular, he points out that it's possible for a student to fail a particular learning objective consistently across all courses but still gain a degree that specifies that particular learning objective as a graduate attribute.
|