Assessment and grading of HE in FE colleges: sharing best practice

1
Assessment and grading of HE in FE colleges
sharing best practice

• Tom Cantwell

2
The System

• The Code of Practice
• Awarding Bodies QA systems
• External Examiners
• Internal Verification

3
The Reality

• The course leader writes the course
• The course leader recruits the students
• The course leader teaches the course
• The course leader assesses the work

4
Findings of the Overview Report Learning From HE
in FE (QAA 2005)

• Higher order skills are often insufficiently
  tested
• (P/F) threshold approach deprives the students
• Formal examination or assessment boards are not
  widely employed

5
Course Leaders

• Course leaders write, develop and run courses,
  sometimes single-handedly
• Course leaders have complete responsibility for
  assessment and grading decisions
• Course leaders often teach FE and HE
• Course leaders rarely receive training or
  guidance on the assessment of HE

6
How do course leaders learn to assess and grade?

• From colleagues
• From External Examiners
• From level 3 experience
• By attending external training events
• By making it up themselves, usually independently
  of colleagues in a similar position within the
  same institution

7
Assessment In Practice The nice thing about
standards is that there are so many of them to
choose from (Andrew S. Tanenbaum)
8
A selection of grading systems

• 0-100
• PMD or PCD (/-?)
• Pass/Fail
• A-F (may include /-)
• One you made up yourself, or copied from a website

9
Descriptors

• Excellent gt70
• Very Good
• Good
• Adequate
• Fail lt40

10
Some quotations on grading

• we never grade higher than 90
• We use PMD but with pluses and minuses
• We keep on grading the same piece until its
  good enough to pass
• We have/dont have deadlines
• We allow/dont allow the same piece of work to
  be assessed in multiple modules

11
Some examples

• One institution claims to use two grading
  systems. These are the 0 - 100 system and the
  nine-point scale 0 - 9 Which is ten points.
  Both of these scales are depicted on their
  website alongside the respective A to F grades
  and the PMD grades, making a total of four
  grading systems
• Some universities use 0 - 4, where others use 0 -
  4.3. One uses 0 - 4.33
• All institutions have their own systems of coding
  for referral, deferral, condonation, extension,
  extenuation etc
• HEIs have strong academic boards to develop and
  communicate their internal systems
• FE colleges rely on a mixture that ranges from
  proper academic boards to individual, sometimes
  part-time, lecturers

12
(No Transcript)
13
Cohort Character

• A cohort of 10 students has a group character
• A cohort of 100 students will be fairly similar
  to the next cohort of 100
• Grading profiles vary greatly in small cohorts

14
What would help?

• HE boards within FE colleges to oversee all
  assessment and grading before it reaches the
  validating body
• Cross-college HE training and CPD
• External CPD for course leaders
• Benchmark statements on assessment and grading

15
The case for a database of exemplar materials
with

• Examples of graded academic, theoretical and
  practical work
• Examples of how to give diagnostic, formative and
  summative feedback
• Examples of how to use synoptic assessment
• Suggestions for how course teams might include a
  purely academic module, requiring formal essay
  skills

16
Thank you
17
NEW VOICES Furthering Higher EducationSTRATEGIE
S FOR ASSESSING LIVE PERFORMANCE

• PROTOCOLS
• Presented by
• Chloe Rendall and Clare Gordon
• Hull College
• Hull School of Art Design
• (Performing Arts, Music Media)

18
Why Design Protocols?

• Context of the development
• Identifying grading issues surrounding live
  performance
• Common aspects or issues between specialist
  disciplines

19
Protocol Design

• Reference to University Assessment Criteria
• Reference to learning outcomes

20
Development of Protocols and Application

• Guidance for the student to meet the grade
• Guidance for the assessor to grade appropriately

21
Informing the Grade

• Using the protocols for the purposes of grading
• Feeding back the grade
• Approval and review

22
Example of Core module

• The assessment task

23
ASSESSMENT STRATEGY Performance Realisation
24
Example of Core module

• The assessment task
• Learning outcomes and types of protocols they
  incorporate
• 1 Apply specialist knowledge and understanding to
  production and performance processes.
• 2 Apply the skills and techniques relevant to
  disciplines within the Performing Arts.
• 3 Engage in production and performance roles,
  for the realisation of a performance.

25
Core Module Performance Realisation

• Project management
• The ability to understand the realisation of a
  production in relation to their genre.
• Leadership skills
• Taking creative control of a project and leading
  a team.
• Creativity and innovation
• The use of initiative and imagination in the
  creation of a product or performance project.
• Process
• Engagement with the journey of the whole
  process of production.
• Product
• The success and quality of the final performed
  production or final product.
• Collaboration
• Ability to realise a production which
  incorporates the notions of interdisciplinary
• Personal Development

26
Example of Core module

• The assessment task
• Learning outcomes and types of protocols they
  incorporate
• Weighting of the protocols to be used

27
Feedback to the Student
28
Example of Core module

• The assessment task
• Learning outcomes and types of protocols they
  incorporate
• Weighting of the protocols to be used
• Applying a grade according to University criteria

29
University Grading Criteria
30
(No Transcript)
31
Example of Core module

• The assessment task
• Learning outcomes and types of protocols they
  incorporate
• Weighting of the protocols to be used
• Applying a grade according to University criteria
• Totalling and appropriateness of final grade

32
Feedback to the Student
33
Assessment
34
Specialist Module Voice
35
Future Developments

• Ongoing developments
• Student feedback
• EE comments
• Written feedback more structured and informed by
  the aspects of assessment

36
QAA Higher Education in Further Education
Colleges

• Foundation Degrees
• Assessments in the Workplace
• M Lochran
• Executive Director Humber Business School
• Grimsby Institute of Further and
• Higher Education

37
Foundation Degrees Assessments in the Workplace

• Why work based degrees
• Ensuring employer engagement
• Managing offsite WBL
• Ensuring Equality / Parity
• Lesson learned / pitfalls

38
Why Work Based Degrees

• 2003 FDs developed in Key sectors Food,
  Manufacturing, Logistics
• GIFHE and Work Based Projects
• Net loss of graduates to the area
• Non traditional learners into HE
• Productivity, Productivity, Productivity

39
Why Work Based Degrees

• Stimulating demand the choice
• Building in qualities, features and images that
  enhance the offer
• or
• cutting the price

40
Ensuring employer engagement

• Future defining companies
• Intermediaries/ supply chains
• Link into existing group/create steering group
• Employers involved in the development of the
  modules/projects
• Senior Management buy in
• Tangible and quantifiable benefits to the bottom
  line

41
Ensuring employer engagement

• Dilemma
• Do we want to be masters of certain
  technologies for which we seek markets, or master
  of markets for which we would seek customer
  satisfying products

42
Managing offsite WBL

• Access to resources
• Additional support
• 3 way contract
• Currency/credibility of tutors
• New approaches and ideas
• Employers as a resource
• Workplace mentors/coaches
• E-learning/support

43
Ensuring Equality / Parity

• HE Experience
• Rationalisation of provision
• Convincing employers of validity
• Learning support
• Ensuring progression routes
• Individual support through coaching, mentoring
  and guidance

44
Ensuring Equality / Parity

• Individualised Learning
• Placed in the same system, people however
  different, tend to produce similar results

45
Lessons learned

• Employer involvement at all stages
• Progression routes identified from the outset
• Appropriate assessment and delivery methods
• Provision of additional support
• Flexibility, Flexibility, Flexibility

46
Lessons learned

• The problem is never how to get new, innovative
  thoughts into your mind, but how to get the old
  ones out

47
Pitfalls

• Problems associated with non traditional learners
• Group dynamics/belonging
• Lack of employer support
• Learners struggling with academic level
• Duration
• Retention, Retention, Retention

48
Pitfalls

• One of the paradoxes of success is that the
  things and the ways which got you there are,
  seldom the things to keep you there

49
The Student Perspective

• Margaret Harrison and
• Jane Connolly
• University of Gloucestershire

50
Interview
Themes to be covered Introduction knowing the
student Overcoming invisible barriers to
learning and assessment Managing the work load
A students view of assessment tasks Obtaining
a FdA what next?
51
The Student Perspective
Workshop
Margaret Harrison and Jane Connolly University
of Gloucestershire
52
Workshop details Introduction Please state who
you are and what is your engagement with
Foundation degrees? What you hope to get out of
this workshop? Instructions Working in groups
of four please undertake the following
activities. Paper and pens will be provided.
Each group is expected to produce posters and/or
written material which will be shared with all
workshop participants. Each group should
identify a scribe and spokesperson.
53

• Aim of the workshop To consider what are the key
  issues with assessment from a students
  perspective.
• Intended learning outcomes
• To recognise the diversity of the student body
• To appreciate some of the barriers to learning
  and assessment
• To consider how a student undertakes assessment
• To review how students could contribute to the
  setting of assessment

54
Activities Role play (sections 1 and 2) Imagine
you are a student just starting out on a
Foundation degree. Each member of your group
will be given brief personal details of their
student type this information should not be
shared explicitly with the rest of the
group. 1. What are any potential barriers to
undertaking assessment which you the student may
need help with? And how do you think your
Foundation degree teaching team could
help? Barrier Help Please share your
findings with your group. Each group should
provide details of Three examples of barriers and
action to help. Time allowed 15 minutes
55
2. From your perspective as a student, what are
the essential elements of an assessment brief
that you need to know to undertake the work? To
do this you may find it helpful to imagine you
have just received details of your first
assignment, including assessment criteria, think
how you would proceed. Each group should
provide a list of the essential elements of an
assessment brief please put this information on
a poster. Time allowed 15 minutes
56
Now as staff and from your knowledge of
Foundation Degrees 3. What do you identify as
the fundamental principles of an assessment
strategy from the perspective of an Institution
and Employer? Institution Employer
Time allowed 15 minutes
57

• Finally, from what you have learnt of the
  students perspective to assessment suggest how
  their views could be used to revise current
  assessment practice (and strategy) in your
  institution. Think of this as an Action Plan of
  what you can take away from this workshop.
• Create a poster giving Three action points of
  how to incorporate the students perspective in
  assessment.
• Time allowed 15 minutes