This document provides an overview of a webinar on assessment and feedback given by Dr. Tansy Jessop. The webinar examined assessment at the program-level and discussed research conducted by TESTA (Transforming the Experience of Students through Assessment) which analyzed assessment patterns across multiple universities. Key findings from the research included a lack of formative assessment, issues with distributing student effort over time, problems with feedback, and student confusion about goals and standards. The webinar suggested changes to assessment practices such as incorporating more formative assessment, linking assessments across modules, and taking a program-wide approach to assessment design.

1. Zoom to wide-angle lens: whole
programme view of assessment
and feedback
Dr Tansy Jessop, TESTA , University of Winchester
SIAST, Universities of Regina and Saskatchewan,
Briercrest College & Seminary, RCMP College
6 November 2013

2. 1) Introductions and questions
2) TESTA Overview
3) Research Methodology
4) Two case studies -two paradigms?
Q&A
5) Variations
6) Themes across the data
7) Change approaches
Q&A
Webinar Overview

3. 5-10 minutes at the start for introductions
 Your name and role
 Your discipline/career background
 The best assessment or feedback ‘tactic’ you have
encountered and why you think it worked
 Your ‘wicked question’ or assessment problem.
Introductions

4.  Why assessment and feedback?
 Why UK students rank A&F lower on
National Student Survey?
 Why take a ‘programme-level’ view?
 What are systems unintentionally doing to
student learning?
The big questions

5. University of Winchester
Arts
Humanities
Education
Social Sciences
Business & Law
3,000 full time students
5,000 altogether
150 PhD students
Mature students

6.  Higher Education Academy funded research (2009-12)
 Seven programmes in 4 partner universities
 Mapping programme-wide assessment
 Student voice and student perception data
 Evidence and principles to act on
About TESTA
Transforming the Experience of Students through Assessment

7. TESTA ‘Cathedrals Group’ Universities

8. Edinburgh
Edinburgh Napier
Greenwich
Canterbury Christchurch
Glasgow
Lady Irwin College University of Delhi

9.  Website hits map of world

10. TESTA
“…is a way of thinking
about assessment and
feedback”
Graham Gibbs

11.  Captures and distributes sufficient student time and
effort - time on task
 Challenging learning with clear goals and standards,
encouraging deep learning
 Sufficient, high quality feedback, received on time, with a
focus on learning
 Students pay attention to the feedback and it guides
future studies – feeding-forward
 Students are able to judge their own performance
accurately, self-regulating
Based on assessment principles
http://www2.glos.ac.uk/offload/tli/lets/lathe/issue1/articles/simpson.pdf

12. TESTA Research Methods
(Drawing on Gibbs and Dunbar-Goddet, 2008,2009)
ASSESSMENT
EXPERIENCE
QUESTIONNAIRE
FOCUS GROUPS
PROGRAMME AUDIT
Programme
Team
Meeting

13.  Number of assessment tasks
 Summative/formative
 Variety
 Proportion of exams
 Oral feedback
 Written feedback
 Speed of return of feedback
 Specificity of criteria, aims and learning outcomes.
Audit in a nutshell

14.  Quantity of Effort
 Coverage of content and knowledge
 Clear goals and standards
 Quantity and Quality of Feedback
 Use of feedback
 Appropriate assessment
 Learning from exams
 Deep and surface learning
Assessment Experience
Questionnaire

15. Focus Groups
 Student voice and narrative
 Explanation
 Corroboration & contradiction
 Compelling evidence with the stats

16.  tells a good story
 raises a thought-provoking issue
 has elements of conflict
 promotes empathy with the central characters
 lacks an obvious, clear-cut answer
 takes a position, demands a decision &
 is relatively concise (Gross-Davis 1993)
Case Study…

17. Case Study X: what’s going on?
 Committed and innovative lecturers
 Lots of coursework, of very varied forms
 No exams
 Masses of written feedback on assignments (15,000 words)
 Learning outcomes and criteria clearly specified
….looks like a ‘model’ assessment environment
But students:
 Don’t put in a lot of effort and distribute their effort across few topics
 Don’t think there is a lot of feedback or that it very useful, and don’t
make use of it
 Don’t think it is at all clear what the goals and standards
 …are unhappy

18. A. Variety of assessment types confuses students
B. Assessment in ‘bunched’ at certain times
C. Too much feedback, too late
D. Teachers mark differently; students are uncertain about the
standards
E. A diet of all coursework and no exams leads to lack of
integration and synthesis
• Select your response from the buttons (A B C D E) at the bottom-
right of the list of participants
• Type any other comments/ideas/thoughts into the text-chat
What’s the main problem?

19. Case Study Y: what’s going on?
 35 summative assessments
 No formative assessment specified in documents
 Learning outcomes and criteria wordy and woolly
 Marking by global, tacit, professional judgements
 Teaching staff mainly part-time and hourly paid
….looks like a problematic assessment environment
But students:
 Put in a lot of effort and distribute their effort across topics
 Have a very clear idea of goals and standards
 Are self-regulating and have a good idea of how to close the gap

20. A. Students are sharing and reviewing work in class
B. Peer review is helping students to understand goals and
standards
C. Inadequate documentation is driving more dialogue
D. Students are more self-reliant than teacher-reliant
E. Authentic assessment linked to real-life processes and
products
• Select your response from the buttons (A B C D E) at the bottom-
right of the list of participants
• Type any other comments/ideas/thoughts into the text-chat
What’s working?

21. Transmission model
Expert to novice
Planned & ‘delivered’
Feedback by experts
Feedback to novices
Privatised
Monologue
Emphasis on measuring
Competition
Metaphor - machine
Social constructivist model
Participatory, democratic
Messy and process-oriented
Peer review
Self-evaluation
Social process
Dialogue
Emphasis on learning
Collaboration
Metaphor - the journey
Two paradigms

22. Q & A

23.  Between 12 and 68 summative tasks
 Between 0 and 55 formative tasks
 From 7 to 17 different types of assessment
 Feedback returned within 10 - 35 days
 936 written words of feedback to 15,412
words
 37 minutes to 30 hours of oral feedback
 0% to 79% of assessment by exams
Variations on 23 UG programmes
in 8 UK universities

24. A. Influence of different disciplinary practices
B. Individual and modular autonomy
C. Lack of whole programme design
D. Absence of comparable standards across universities
E. Assessment lower down the pecking order than content,
knowledge, skills etc.
• Select your response from the buttons (A B C D E) at the bottom-
right of the list of participants
• Type any other comments/thoughts/ideas into the text-chat
Why so many variations?

25. My hunch: assessment is an
afterthought in curriculum design
How instructors view L & T
What course content?
What outcomes?
What methods?
What assessment?
How students view L&T
How will I be assessed?
What do I need to know?
What are the objectives?
What approaches to study
should I take?
http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/assessinglearning/

26. Theme 1: Lack of formative assessment
Theme 2: Systems failure on time-on-task
Theme 3: Feedback problems
Theme 4: Student bewilderment about goals &
standards
Four themes

27. “Formative assessment is concerned with how
judgements about the quality of student responses can
be used to shape and improve students’ competence by
short-circuiting the randomness and inefficiency of trial-
and-error learning” (Sadler, 1989, p.120).
TESTA: unmarked, required, eliciting feedback
Theme 1: Lack of formative assessment

28. Rethinking formative and summative
Tasting soup (Stake, 1991)
Formative
Summative

29.  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.
 Getting feedback from other students in my class helps. I can relate
to what they’re saying and take it on board. I’d just shut down if I
was getting constant feedback from my lecturer.
 I find more helpful the feedback you get in informal ways week by
week, but there are some people who just hammer on about what
will get them a better mark.
The potential

30.  If there weren’t loads of other assessments, I’d do it.
 If there are no actual consequences of not doing it, most students
are going to sit in the bar.
 It’s good to know you’re being graded because you take it more
seriously.
 I would probably work for tasks, but for a lot of people, if it’s not
going to count towards your degree, why bother?
 The lecturers do formative assessment but we don’t get any
feedback on it.
The barriers…

31. A. 116
B. 50
C. 25
D. 12
E. 6
• Select your response from the buttons (A B C D E) at the bottom-
right of the list of participants
• Type any other comments/thoughts/ideas into the text-chat
How many x do you need to measure
student achievement in a 3 year
degree?

32. We could do with more assessments over the course of the year
to make sure that people are actually doing stuff.
We get too much of this end or half way through the term essay
type things. Continual assessments would be so much better.
So you could have a great time doing nothing until like a month
before Christmas and you’d suddenly panic. I prefer steady
deadlines, there’s a gradual move forward, rather than bam!
Theme 2: Time-on-task

33. Effort Map: Holland Vs Alps (Graham)
Week 6 Week 12
Low Effort
Modest Effort
Max effort

34.  It was about nine weeks… I’d forgotten what I’d written.
 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”.
 Once the deadline comes up to just look on the Internet and
say ‘Right, that’s my mark. I don’t need to know too much
about why I got it’.
 You know that twenty other people have got the same sort of
comment.
Theme 3: Feedback - common problems

35.  The feedback is generally focused on the module.
 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.
 Because it’s at the end of the module, it doesn’t feed
into our future work.
 You’ll get really detailed, really commenting feedback
from one tutor and the next tutor will just say ‘Well
done’.
Programme-related feedback issues

36.  1220 AEQ returns, 23 programmes, 8 universities
 Statistical relationship between the quantity and
quality of feedback and students’ understanding of
goals and standards
 r=0.696, p<0.01
Feedback really matters…

37.  It is a formal document so the language is quite complex and I’ve
had to read it a good few times to kind of understand what they
are saying.
 Assessment criteria can make you take a really narrow approach.
 It’s such a guessing game.... You don’t know what they expect
from you.
 I don’t have any idea of why it got that mark.
 They read the essay and then they get a general impression, then
they pluck a mark from the air.
 It’s a shot in the dark.
Theme 4: Student bewilderment
on goals and standards

38. 1. Less summative, more formative
2. Multi-stage formative-summative cycles
3. Feedback: dialogue, peer-to-peer; feedback before marks
4. Longer modules, linking and sequencing across modules
5. Attention to timing of tasks, bunching and spreading
6. Quicker return times
7. Streamlining variety of assessment
8. Challenging students to do more, at a higher level
9. Structural changes; integrated synoptic assessments
Changes to assessment patterns

39. Q&A

40. Team approach
INDIVIDUALS OR TEAMS?

41.  Programme evidence brings the team together
 Addresses variations of standards
 The module vs greater good of the programme
 Helps to confront protectionism and silos
 Develops collegiality and conversations about
pedagogy
TESTA is about the team

42. TESTA is about coherence

43. www.testa.ac.uk

44. Gibbs, G. & Simpson, C. (2004) Conditions under which assessment supports students'
learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. 1(1): 3-31.
Gibbs, G. & Dunbar-Goddet, H. (2009). Characterising programme-level assessment
environments that support learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 34,4:
481-489.
Hattie, J. (2007) The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research. 77(1) 81-112.
Jessop, T. , El Hakim, Y. and Gibbs, G. (2013) 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. ifirst.
Jessop, T, McNab, N and Gubby, L. (2012) Mind the gap: An analysis of how quality
assurance processes influence programme assessment patterns. Active Learning in
Higher Education. 13(3). 143-154.
Jessop, T., El Hakim and Gibbs (2011) Research Inspiring Change. Educational
Developments. 12(4).
Nicol, D. (2010) From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in
mass higher education, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35: 5, 501 – 517
Sadler, D.R. (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems,
Instructional Science, 18, 119-144.
References