UCD Fellows in Teaching and Academic Development Exploring the Practice of Assessment in First Year Suzanne Guerin – School of Psychology Jonathan McNulty – School of Medicine & Medical Science Michael Staunton – School of History & Archives
Dec 28, 2015
UCD Fellows in Teaching and Academic Development
Exploring the Practice of Assessment in First Year
Suzanne Guerin – School of Psychology
Jonathan McNulty – School of Medicine & Medical Science
Michael Staunton – School of History & Archives
Introduction
• Assessment is central to teaching and learning practice and policy (Goos, Gannaway & Hughes, 2011)
• Evidence of increased awareness and variation
• Continues to be an area for improvement (Craddock & Mathias, 2009)
• Developments can create challenges for key stakeholders (Brew, Riley & Walta, 2009)
• Little research into provision of assessment, choice of methods and factors that influence practice (Craddock & Mathias, 2009)
Aim and Justification for Study• Aim of this study is to explore the practice of assessment in
first year teaching
• Underpinned by centrality of assessment, esp. in first year, in UCD’s education strategy; One of the key aims of which is:
‘To foster early and lasting student engagement’,
which includes : ‘A review and reform of the structure, outcomes, assessment and remediation strategies for first year, and in particular the first semester, to support the transition from second- to third-level and to adapt to the different needs of different students; The further development of approaches to engage and support students, especially in their first year, including small group learning, peer-mentoring, academic advice and mentoring, specific supports for the development of transferable skills and information literacy, and general welfare supports‘.
Justification
• We need to examine practice against UCD Teaching & Learning assessment principles (O’Neill & Noonan, 2011):– regular, low stakes assessment with opportunity for
feedback on their progress– in-class self and/or peer review– collaborative learning (peer & group work, project
work)– redesign of learning sequence, blended learning
opportunities– Active/task-based learning with more authentic
assessments (subject/discipline identity)– Awareness of student work-load
Research Questions
• What factors currently contribute to assessment practice in first year modules?
• What supports and obstacles are evident in assessment practice?
• To what extent are assessment practices aligned with the UCD assessment principles?
Overarching design
1. Module review (Autumn 2011-Spring 2012)
2. Survey of staff (Autumn 2012)
3. Case studies (Spring-Summer 2013)
Phase 1: Module Review
• Aim: to establish the types of assessment used in first year modules and key patterns
• Examined institutional data provided in Module Descriptors, which contain the core information provided to students
• Content analysis (Downe‐Wamboldt, 1992) of information from 2011-2012
• 627 first year modules, drawn from 36 schools in the Colleges of Arts and Celtic Studies, Business and Law, Engineering and Architecture, Health Sciences, Human Sciences, and Science
Module review: Key Findings
• Average module size = 149 (Range 10-647)
• Average number of assessments = 2.5 (Range 0-8)
• Only 11.8% of modules included reference to assessment in the module descriptor text
Module review: Assessment Type
Module review: Assessment Timing
Phase 2: Designing a Survey of Staff
• Aim of survey is to examine practice of assessment in more detail
• Series of key stakeholder interviews conducted to inform design of the survey
• Seven individuals (four male, three female) from administration, academic and management positions
• Thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) used to identify main themes
Phase 2: Interview Findings
• Recognised importance of assessment – as both a positive and negative influence:
“I think the assessment can be a hindrance [on engagement]. On the other hand, of course, it keeps the guys who are not genuinely excited going because they know they are going to be
assessed.”
Phase 2: Elements of Assessment
Discussion: module review and interviews
• Average number of assessments lower than previously identified and fewer modules had three or more assessments (O’Neill & Noonan, 2011).
• Variation in methods reflects Craddock & Mathias (2009) though clear emphasis on exams.
• Interviews identified a broad range of influencing assessment choices reflects previous research (Harris & James, 2006; Havnes & McDowell, 2008).
• Patterns suggest limited impact of the UCD assessment principles (O’Neill & Noonan, 2011).
14
Staff survey: online questionnaire
• Survey of all staff involved in delivery of first year modules
• Survey examines:– Current assessment practice in first year
modules– Related workload for staff and students– Familiarity with and attitudes towards the
UCD Assessment Principles– Factors influencing assessment practice
Staff Survey: Methodology
• Online survey of staff
• Targets staff listed as coordinating Level 1 UG modules in 2011-2012 and 2012-2013
• Initial email to Heads of School and Heads of Teaching & Learning in all schools
• Invitation email sent by Prof. Bairbre Redmond to stress institutional importance of the survey
• Follow up email after two weeks (due week of 26/11/12)
Staff Survey: Preliminary Analysis
• 52 responses to date, 61.5% completed
• 44% male, 44% female, 12% missing data
• Years teaching in UCD:– Range 1-35 yrs, Average = 10.9 (SD = 7.35)
• Number of Stage 1 UG modules coordinated– Range 1- 5, Mode = 1
• Number of Stage 1 UG modules taught– Range 1- 5, Mode = 1
• Teaching & Learning Responsibilities: 65.4%
What College are you based in?
Assessment Types Examined
Types of Assessment Used
Module review: Assessment Type
Types of Assessment Used• Evidence of group assignments, self- and peer- assessment,
active / task-based assessments, learning journals, etc.
• Assessment FOR learning
Additional Questions on Assessment
• What proportion of the module does the assessment account for?
• How useful are the methods of assessment?
• What is the associated workload for staff and for students?
• Definition and use of formative assessment.
• Awareness and views of UCD assessment principles
• Factors influencing assessment practice
• Views on strengths and limitations of current module descriptor system
Phase 3: Case studies: sampling criteria• Stratified sampling:
– Module size– Number of assessments above and below the mean– Traditional v non-traditional forms of assessments– Involvement in T & L
e.g. 4 large modules, half with assessments above the mean, half below
4 small modules, half with assessments above the mean
• one case study per block (n=8)
Case studies: data collection
• Documentary material e.g. module guides
• Student feedback (via module coordinators)
• Focus groups with students
• Interviews with module coordinators
Data analysis:
• anonymous cross case analysis (public),
• underpinned by individual case analysis (private)
Thank you
• Suzanne Guerin – [email protected]
• Jonathan McNulty – [email protected]
• Michael Staunton – [email protected]
UCD Fellowships funded under the Strategic Innovation Fund II