‘Developing & embedding
inclusive assessment across
Plymouth University’
Professor Pauline Kneale and Jane Collings
1
Challenging myths and changing
approaches to assessment
•
•
•
•
Difficult territory
Powerful myths
Disciplinary defences
Spaces of resistance
• Broadening possibilities
• Entering ‘brave’ new spaces
• Transformational learning that is equitable.
2
3
What students say..
Sophie – Biomedical Science
What are the explicit and implicit messages
in the video clip?
4
Definition from the literature
Inclusive assessment refers to
the design and use of fair and
effective assessment methods
and practices that enable all
students to demonstrate to their
full potential what they know,
understand and can do
(Hockings, 2010, p.2)
Illustrations by Chris Glynn
5
Why inclusive assessment ?
Through inclusive design wherever possible, and through
individual reasonable adjustments wherever required,
assessment tasks provide every student with an equal
opportunity to demonstrate their achievement. (QAA.2013
UK Quality Code for Higher Education, Ch B6)
Traditional assessment practices that were
once dominated by the unseen examination
and the standard essay…have proved unable
to capture the range and nature of the diverse
learning outcomes now sought from courses.”
(Boud & Falchikov 2006)
6
Types of Assessment
Diagnostic
Assessment
(Preparing)
• provides an
indicator learner’s
existing knowledge
and capabilities
• develop self
regulated learner.
• identify possible
learning support
needs .
Formative
Assessment
(Improving)
Summative
Assessment
(Judging)
• provide learners
with timely
feedback/forward
• progression and
certification
purposes
• intended to have
an impact on
current learning
and ultimately to
be connected to
improved
performance
• students often use
performances in
summative tasks
as a proxy
measure of
learning
Crisp (2012)
7
An inclusive approach
Waterfield & West (2006) SPACE Project
Plymouth University
Contingent
approach
offers
provision of
special
arrangements
or
adjustments
within existing
systems
Alternative
approach
offers
different
assessment
methods as a
bolt-on for a
minority of
disabled
students.
Inclusive
approach
is designed to
ensure
accessibility
for all
students and
reduces the
need for
MAPs.
8
NSS: Assessment and feedback
( % agree )
National Student Survey
Assessment
2009
%
2010
2011
2012 2013 2014
%
%
%
%
%
Clear marking criteria
70
71
72
74
76
77
Assessment is fair
72
72
73
75
77
78
Feedback is prompt
57
59
62
65
68
69
Provides detailed comments
62
63
66
69
71
72
Clarifies student queries
57
58
60
63
66
67
Overall student satisfaction
81
81
83
84
85
86
Feedback
9
There is some excellent practice….
Student Comments:
Source: UPSU Student Voice Report (2014)
‘Feedback is both comprehensive and constructive whether
formative or summative. I now know exactly where I can improve
without ever feeling stupid or a failure.’
‘Feedback was so clear and showed me how to develop my work
in the future.’
‘Feedback is often sent back within a matter of hours after
sending work off for formative marking, meaning students can
improve and work on skills needed continuously
10
There is more improvement required ……
Student Open Comments
Source: (NSS 2014)
‘The assessments were vague and
unclear leaving me puzzled and
confused- I have no idea what
makes an A, B or C’.
‘The coursework was outdated, and
difficult because it lacked industry
relevance’
‘I was unsure of the assignment
requirements/criteria despite
attending all tutorials and
discussions with the module lead’,
‘The disparity in grades and feedback
was vast: some being penalised for
grammatical, spelling or referencing
errors, whilst others were not! ‘
‘We need formative assessment at
the beginning so we can improve
in summative assessments’
‘I spent 4 months writing my
dissertation project and when I got it
back there was five lines of feedback,
I felt like I’d wasted my time'
‘The coursework guidance was
ambiguous’
‘Feedback took over 20 days to return
and was unclear how my work could
be improved’
11
Assessment for Learning
o What are the issues?
o What are the cultural implications?
o Why now?
o What do we need to do ?
Comments onto post it notes
12
Developing an inclusive
assessment strategy
13
Inclusive Assessment
why now at Plymouth ?
• The increasing diversity of students in UK
• An increase in disabled students & associated modified
assessment provision costs
• Student voice -low scores in NSS for assessment and
feedback
• NUS & UPSU focus on assessment and feedback
• In 2012 a review of PU assessment provision indicated
inconsistent practices
• An increase in appeals & settlements
• A strategic focus on student retention through regular
meaningful formative assessment tasks and prompt
feedback.
14
Plymouth University inclusive
assessment ambition:
‘all students will have an equitable, supported assessment
experience’.
Inclusive assessments will : Fairly evaluate students’ ability to meet module and programme
learning outcomes and academic standards
 Be accessible for all students
 Provide every student with an equal opportunity to demonstrate their
achievement
 Support student engagement, learning, progression, retention and
address the needs of our diverse student population
 Be authentic and offer students contextualised meaningful tasks that
replicate real world challenges through effective programme design.
 Reduce the need for modified assessment provision
15
PU Assessment Policy: 2014
• Pre- assessment / feed-in activities & information,
discussion, feed-in with clear assessment and marking
criteria
• Authentic, MAP free/ simple assessment methods
aligned to learning outcomes.
• Scheduling - throughout the year, normally only 2
summative assignments in 20credit modules.
• Access to software for electronic submission and
originality checking software.
• Fairly marked, anonymously ( if appropriate) with
moderation
• Feed-forward & feedback with marks (asap) but within
20 days
16
Resources to assist programme level
review of assessment
17
Inclusive does not mean ‘easier’
or ‘avoiding things’
Inclusivity can be enhanced through:-
Feed-in
 Feed-in/ briefing
 Formative
assessment
 Progressive
staging of
assessment
(building complexity)
Set up, briefing, preparation,
Practice & rehearse,
assessment & marking criteria
Learning
Space
Feedback
end of task,
written, verbal,
mp3, YouTube,
marks/grades
Feed-forward
Formative ‘feedback’, cues,
discussion, mid-way reviews,
peer & self review/feedback
( Magne 2012)
18
Example

Year:
1/2/3/4/5



RAG Rating - Red – Amber – Green


Inclusivity indicator/ risk factors

Teamwork
Communication skills
Work placed aligned
Scheduling bottlenecks
Modified assessment
provision
feed -forward / feed
back
offers progression
feed-in /preparation
Information leaflet
Presentation /viva
Open book exam
Website/ wiki /podcast
Reflective journal
Essay
Case study/ lab report
IPSE / OSCE
MCQ exam
Reviewing assessment in a programme
Skills development

(Collings & Magne 2013)

Module 1
Module 2
Module 3
Module 4
Module 5
Module 6
19
20
Designing and Developing inclusive
assessment
21
Improved design
• Assignments aligned to learning
outcomes & assessment criteria
• A range of assessment methods: authentic/work
related & few modification implications
• Schedule assessments evenly across the year
• Offer students detailed pre-assessment activities
• Offer progression and opportunities to practice
• Design inclusive examinations with 50% max
weighting
• Well written and clearly structured questions
• Consider a choice of assessment methods
(maximum of 2)
22
Design inclusive
assessment methods
Example of a staff development activity:
Using the assessment methods hand-out on
the tables
23
Traditional Assessment
a) Introduction to Marketing
(Principles, overview & apply concepts)
Current assessment methods
• 4 x multiple choice question tests - 30% weighting
• 3 hour unseen exam –70% weighting
b) Introduction to Animal Feed Management
(Principles, & feed management plan)
Current assessment methods
• 3 short tests - 20% weighting
• 3 hour unseen exam - 80% weighting
What are the other assessment method options ?
24
Examples of inclusive practice at
Plymouth University
Education: offers a choice of two assessment methods
Law: fewer traditional exams, now ‘open book’ & ‘seen’ exams, more
formative short answer & MCQ tests.
Accounting & Finance : 100% coursework assessment for modules
without professional body exemptions and formative assessment
opportunities replace tests.
History: work-facing assessments
Marine Biology: formative assessment via peer review
Marketing: no traditional exams, authentic assessments (e.g. group
reports, marketing plans and presentations)
Navigation & Maritime Science: assessment briefings, revision
sessions, 8 hour assignment with a 27 hour time limit, 1.5 hour
class tests with the room invigilated for 3 hours.
25
Impact of inclusive intervention at
Plymouth University
Improvements in student Assessment
satisfaction scores
Feedback
Accounting and Finance +20%
+16%
Business Administration +36%
+14%
Marketing
+31%
-4%
School of Tourism and
Hospitality
Physiotherapy
+19%
+17%
+20%
+16%
Dental Surgery
+20%
+23%
Engineering
+32%
+22%
National Student Survey: 2014.
26
Challenging myths and changing
approaches to assessment
•
•
•
•
Difficult territory
Powerful myths
Disciplinary defences
Spaces of resistance
• Broadening possibilities
• Entering ‘brave’ new spaces
• Transformational learning that is equitable.
27
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Boud, D. & Falchikov, N. (2006) Aligning assessment with long term
learning. Assessment & Evaluation in HE. vol31.no4.p399-413
Crisp, G. (2012) Integrative assessment: Reframing assessment practice for
current and future learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher
Education, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 33-43.
Hockings, C. (2010) Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education: a
synthesis of research. Higher Education Academy resource.
Mogey, N., Purcell, M., Pateson, J., Burke. J .; ( 2013) Handwriting or typing
exams – can we give students the choice?
O’Neill, G. (2011). A Practitioner’s Guide to Choice of Assessment Methods
within a Module: Case Studies for University College Dublin. Dublin
QAA: (2013) UK Quality Code for HE. Chapter B6. Assessment of students
and recognition of prior learning
Waterfield, J., & West, B.,(2006) Inclusive Assessment in Higher Education:
A Resource for Change. Plymouth University
28
Comprehensive staff resource.
http://www1.plymouth.ac.uk/ouruniversity/teachlearn/guidancer
esources/Pages/Assessment.aspx
29
30
Conducting inclusive exams
• Weighting of exams– no more than 50%
• Use a range of exam methods (e.g seen, open book, take
home etc.)
• Signpost support for exam technique sessions
•
Prepare students for exams -feed-in / feed-forward
• Taking the anxiety out of exams through opportunities to
practice and rehearse
• Ensure students receive feedback after each exam
• Offer students the opportunity to type exams and use
assistive software ( Mogey 2013)
31