Being the middle (wo)man - Designing assessment workflows that make everyone happy... ish
•
0 likes•784 views
1) The document discusses designing assessment workflows that integrate online submission, marking, and grading tools to satisfy various stakeholders. 2) It provides background on two parallel projects - one integrating quality systems and another implementing online submitting and grading tools. 3) Successes so far include online student submission, basic online marking, and provisional grades/feedback, but challenges remain around timelines, training, integration of tools and information.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (7)
Similar to Being the middle (wo)man - Designing assessment workflows that make everyone happy... ish
Similar to Being the middle (wo)man - Designing assessment workflows that make everyone happy... ish (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Being the middle (wo)man - Designing assessment workflows that make everyone happy... ish
- 1. Being the middle (wo)man Designing assessment workflows that make everyone happy… ish Durham Blackboard User Group, January 2013 Adel Gordon University of Northampton
- 2. Disclaimer I’m not a Workflows expert
- 3. Background • 2 x projects running in parallel – QNIG (QL & NILE Integration Group) – SaGE (Submitting and Grading Electronically) • New sites for 12/13 based on QA templates – As well as: • SaGE across whole Institution • New Blackboard theme • Change of tools (Bb blogs & wikis, Kaltura, EduBlogs…)
- 5. Where are we now… • First phase of SaGE up and running • Piloting rubrics (to build grades and give clear criteria) Next phase • Integrate Image source: http://channelnomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Integrate.jpg
- 6. Successes • Student submission • Basic level of online marking • Provisional grades & feedback delivered to students online • Initial procedures for second marking and external moderation (but…)
- 7. Challenges • Timescales • Training • Grading challenges – Letter Grades/Grading Schemas – Turnitin • Integration (naming conventions of submission areas) • Getting all the information we need!
- 8. Who is involved? Admins Academics Externals Quality LT Execs Students Systems
- 9. Lessons Learned • Too flexible? – Limit to one tool • Student experience – Limit to first year students • Letter grading – a step too far? • Paper processes • Second marking and external moderation
Editor's Notes
- QNIG Phase 1, 2 summers ago Phase 2, last summer New sites for 12/13 based on QA templates (data matching, more later) SaGE - Across institution from Sept 12
- Student Point – Turnitin, Assignment Tool, Blogs Wikis.. First marker Second marker
- Integrate – not systems, but processes Making best use of the processes we ’ ve put into place for their L&T benefits and pulling out data to satisfy admin. Minimising and sometimes eliminating duplication. Not an institution that goes down the customisation route. We don ’ t have the support in house to sustain and support customisations and therefore it could drastically affect our upgrade schedules.
- Timescales – pushed forward from top, resisted from tutors Letter grading – primary display can ’ t default to customised schemas Turnitin doesn ’ t accept letter grades Naming conventions – NILE admin… API for Turnitin to use flat files to create submission points? Training – get to everyone? Partner colleges, part time tutors, tutors that don ’ t want to Getting all the information we need – Admins, second marking (varying practice), external moderations (give examples of the forms – 6 different forms that I know of). Determining the processes and the varying practice and rationalising them to develop a central process.
- Grading Notes area in the Grade Centre Training – get to everyone? Partner colleges, part time tutors, tutors that don ’ t want to Timescales – pushed forward from top, resisted from tutors Letter grading – primary display can ’ t default to customised schemas Turnitin doesn ’ t accept letter grades Naming conventions – NILE admin… API for Turnitin to use flat files to create submission points? Getting all the information we need – Admins, second marking (varying practice), external moderations (give examples of the forms – 6 different forms that I know of). Determining the processes and the varying practice and rationalising them to develop a central process.
- LTs tended organically move into the middle position – where officially a project team.
- Too flexible – limit to Turnitin Student experience - first years only Paper processes – need a very clear overview of all the paper processes Lobbying HeLF Heads of eLearning Forum – blackboard for UK specific processes, Make sure that everyone can see the benefits that they will get – SAO, not sure they were open and honest as they saw it as a threat.