Talk with the MA Medical Educators at the University of Winchester, 22 March 2019.

1. A broken assessment paradigm?
@solentlearning
@tansyjtweets
Tansy Jessop
Medical Educators
22 March 2019

2. This session
• Assessment and feedback troubles
• Rationale for taking a programme approach
• Brief description of TESTA
• Three themes
– High summative: low formative
– Disconnected feedback
– Confusion about standards

3. Why take a programme approach?
1. A modular problem
2. A curriculum problem
3. An alienation problem
4. An engagement solution

4. A modular problem

5. A curriculum problem

6. An alienation problem
Image, "Alienation Nightmare" © 1996 by Sabu

7. Motorways to alienation
• M1: Modules
• M2: Markets
• M3: Metrics
• M4: Mass higher education

8. An engagement solution?
More
engaging
formative
Less
measuring
Students
learning
more
Curriculum
less stuffed

9. Programme approach seems to
improve things
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 OS
AVERAGENSSSCORES
COMPARISON OF 32 PROGS IN 13 UNIVERSITIES WITH SECTOR SCORES
NSS 2015 SCORES TESTA SCORES

11. Research and change process
Programme
Team
Meeting
Assessment
Experience
Questionnaire
(AEQ)
TESTA
Programme
Audit
Student
Focus Groups

13. TESTA definitions
Summative:
graded assessment which counts towards the degree
Formative:
Does not count: ungraded, required task with
feedback

14. Assessment features across a 3 year UG degree (n=73)
Characteristic Range
Summative 12 -227
Formative 0 - 116
Varieties of assessment 5 - 21
Proportion of examinations 0% - 87%
Time to return marks & feedback 10 - 42 days
Volume of oral feedback 37 -1800 minutes
Volume of written feedback 936 - 22,000 words

15. Typical A&F patterns
73 programmes in 14 unis (Jessop and Tomas 2017)
Characteristic Low Medium High
Volume of summative
assessment
Below 33 40-48 More than 48
Volume of formative only Below 1 5-19 More than 19
% of tasks by examinations Below 11% 22-31% More than
31%
Variety of assessment
methods
Below 8 11-15 More than 15
Written feedback in words Less than
3,800
6,000-7,600 More than
7,600

16. Assessment loads: how much is too much?
(Tomas and Jessop 2018)
Summative
Exams

17. Theme 1:
High summative with low formative
• Low formative to summative ratio of 1:8 (UK,
NZ, Ireland)
• Summative as ‘pedagogy of control’
• Formative weakly practised and understood

18. Assessment Arms Race

19. A lot of people don’t do wider
reading. You just focus on your
essay question.
In Weeks 9 to 12 there is hardly
anyone in our lectures. I'd rather
use those two hours of lectures
to get the assignment done.
It’s been non-stop
assignments, and I’m now
free of assignments until
the exams – I’ve had to
rush every piece of work
I’ve done.
CONSEQUENCES
OF HIGH
SUMMATIVE

20. It was really useful. We
were assessed on it but we
weren’t officially given a
grade, but they did give us
feedback on how we did.
It didn’t actually count so
that helped quite a lot
because it was just a
practice and didn’t really
matter what we did and we
could learn from mistakes
so that was quite useful.
The benefits
of formative

21. If there weren’t loads
of other assessments,
I’d do it.
It’s good to know you’re
being graded because
you take it more
seriously.
BUT… If there are no actual
consequences of not doing
it, most students are going
to sit in the bar.
The lecturers do formative
assessment but we don’t get
any feedback on it.

22. Formative is the hardest nut to crack…
Go to www.menti.com and use the code 97 97 66
Type in three reasons why students may be
reluctant to invest time and energy in completing
formative assessment tasks

23. 1) Low-risk way of learning from feedback (Sadler, 1989)
2) Fine-tune understanding of goals (Boud 2000, Nicol 2006)
3) Feedback to lecturers to adapt teaching (Hattie, 2009)
4) Cycles of reflection and collaboration (Biggs 2003; Nicol &
McFarlane Dick 2006)
5) Encourages and distributes student effort (Gibbs 2004).
Yet formative is vital

24. How you encourage formative
Go to www.menti.com and use the code 54 62 6
Choose your top three strategies for engaging
students in formative assessment
…Or talk to each other about successful strategies

25. Case Study 1
• Systematic reduction of summative across
whole business school
• Systematic ramping up of formative
• All working to similar script
• Whole department shift, experimentation,
less risky together

26. Case Study 2
• Problem: silent seminar, students not reading
• Public platform blogging
• Current academic texts
• In-class
• Threads and live discussion
• Linked to summative

27. Case Study 3
• Problem: lack of discrimination about sources
• Students bring 1 x book, 1 x chapter, 1 x
journal article, 2 x pop culture articles to
seminar
• Justify choices to group
• Reach consensus about five best sources
• Add to reading list

28. Case study 4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVFwQzlVFy0

29. Case Study 5

30. Your task
• Discuss and identify principles for making
formative work.
• How could you use or adapt any of these
ideas?

31. Principles to encourage formative
1. Rebalance summative and formative
2. Whole programme approach
3. Link formative and summative
4. Authentic, public domain tasks
5. Creative, collaborative, challenging tasks
6. Relational and conversational feedback

32. Theme 2: Disconnected feedback

33. The feedback is
generally focused
on the module
Because it’s at the end
of the module, it doesn’t
feed into our future
work.
If It’s difficult because your
assignments are so detached
from the next one you do for
that subject. They don’t
relate to each other.
I read it and think “Well,
that’s fine but I’ve already
handed it in now and got the
mark. It’s too late”.
STRUCTURAL

34. It was like ‘Who’s
Holly?’ It’s that
relationship where
you’re just a student.
Because they have to mark so
many that our essay becomes
lost in the sea that they have
to mark.
Here they say ‘Oh yes, I don’t
know who you are. Got too
many to remember, don’t
really care, I’ll mark you on
your assignment’.
RELATIONAL

35. A feedback dialogue

36. Irretrievable breakdown…
Your essay lacked structure and
your referencing is problematic
Your classes are boring and I
don’t really like you 

37. A way of thinking about assessment and
feedback?

38. Ways to be dialogic
• Conversation: who starts the dialogue?
• Cycles of reflection across modules
• Quick generic feedback
• Feedback synthesis tasks
• Peer feedback (especially on formative)
• Technology: audio, screencast and blogging
• From feedback as ‘telling’…
• … to feedback as asking questions

39. And human….
I use first & second person in feedback
A real person marked this!
You are known
I use plain, imaginative English
No techno-bot-speak allowed!
So last
century!

40. The key to dialogue

41. Students to lecturers:
Critical Incident Questionnaire
Stephen Brookfield’s Critical Incident Questionnaire http://bit.ly/1loUzq0

42. Theme 3: Confusion about goals and
standards
• Consistently low scores on the AEQ for clear
goals and standards
• Alienation from the tools
• Perceptions of marker variation, unfair
standards and inconsistencies in practice

43. We’ve got two
tutors- one marks
completely differently
to the other and it’s
pot luck which one
you get.
They read the essay and then
they get a general impression,
then they pluck a mark from
the air.
It’s like Russian
roulette – you may
shoot yourself and
then get an A1.
They have different
criteria, they build up their
own criteria.

44. There are criteria, but I find them really
strange. There’s “writing coherently,
making sure the argument that you
present is backed up with evidence”.

45. Taking action: internalising goals and
standards
• Regular calibration exercises
• Team discussion and dialogue
Lecturers
• Rewrite/co-create criteria
• Discussing exemplars
Lecturers
and students
• Enter secret garden - peer review
• Engage in drafting processes
Students

46. Shifting paradigms from this…

47. …to the adult equivalent of this

48. References
Barlow, A. and Jessop, T. 2016. “You can’t write a load of rubbish”: Why blogging works as formative
assessment. Educational Developments. 17(3), 12-15. SEDA.
Boud, D. and Molloy, E. (2013) ‘Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of
design’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), pp. 698–712.
Gibbs, G. & Simpson, C. (2004) Conditions under which assessment supports students' learning. Learning
and Teaching in Higher Education. 1(1): 3-31.
Harland, T., McLean, A., Wass, R., Miller, E. and Sim, K. N. (2014) ‘An assessment arms race and its fallout:
High-stakes grading and the case for slow scholarship’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education.
Jessop, T. and Tomas, C. 2017. The implications of programme assessment on student learning. Assessment
and Evaluation in Higher Education.
Jessop, T. and Maleckar, B. 2016. The Influence of disciplinary assessment patterns on student learning: a
comparative study. Studies in Higher Education. Published Online 27 August 2014
Jessop, T. , El Hakim, Y. and Gibbs, G. (2014) The whole is greater than the sum of its parts: a large-scale
study of students’ learning in response to different assessment patterns. Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education. 39(1) 73-88.
Nicol, D. 2010. From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher
education, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35: 5, 501 – 517.
O'Donovan, B , Price, M. and Rust, C. (2008) 'Developing student understanding of assessment standards: a
nested hierarchy of approaches', Teaching in Higher Education, 13: 2, 205 -217.
Sadler, D. R. 1989. ‘Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems’, Instructional Science,
18(2), pp. 119–144.
Tomas, C and Jessop, T. 2018. Struggling and juggling: A comparison of student assessment loads across
research and teaching-intensive universities. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 18 April.
Wu, Q. and Jessop, T. 2018. Formative assessment: missing in action in both research-intensive and teaching-
focused universities. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. Published online 15 January.