Matthew Dean
Faculty of Technology
mjdean@dmu.ac.uk
www.cse.dmu.ac.uk/~mjdean
(Teaching and Learning)

Can a combination of electronic marking
grids (eGrids) and viva based driving tests…

Improve the quality of student feedback?

Optimise staff time spent in assessment?
“How will I cope?”
◦ Voluntary severance
◦ New duties
◦ Potentially excessive marking load

Action Research Approach

Mock NSS Results 
◦ Entire year minus module
◦ Module only

Access logs
Student and Staff Focus Groups
Observation and Reflection 

eGrids used on two second year modules



Multimedia and Internet Technology
◦ Existing module modified to eGrid assessment
◦ 4 x assessment points

Internet Software Development
◦ New module written with eGrids in mind
◦ 3 x assessment points

Both Modules
◦
◦
◦
◦
100% Coursework
Extensive use of on-line videos
1 x 2hr Lab, 1 x Lecture
All TLA provided at the start

Viva based assessment
Allows multiple attempts
Peer learning

Limiting factors


◦
◦
◦
◦

One test a week
Three “time outs”
Sliding scale of marks
Only assessed in taught session
Used so far only on “small” assessments









Confidentiality – G6.77 Account
Server creates the grids
Read only access for student
Students may model grades
Read write access for staff
Staff update grid with grades + feedback
Split into “credit categories”
Grades may be 0, 25, 50, 70 or 100%
Grade is time sensitive

Claims for Credit
◦ Self + peer assessment
◦ May be limited to a single credit category

Formative Claims
 (25% claims)

Review weeks
 Time built into taught sessions for assessment

Summative Claims
 After assignment deadline (time sensitive grade)

Continuous Claims
 Theoretical aspects (time sensitive grade)
A = Definitely Agree, B = Mostly Agree, C= Neither Agree Nor Disagree,
D = Disagree, E= Definitely Disagree
(60 Students over 2 Programmes involving 3 Staff)
Module only %
Minus module %
Assessment and Feedback
A
B
C
D E
A
B
C
D
E
The criteria used in marking have been clear in
advance
56
32
10
3 0
34
48
16
2
0
Assessment arrangements and marking
have been fair
51
30
16
3 0
31
52
11
5
0
Feedback on my work has been prompt
49
37
6
8 0
23
41
28
7
2
I have received detailed comments on my
work
33
40
22
2 3
23
30
36
7
5
Feedback on my work has helped me
clarify things I did not understand
42
34
18
6 0
23
38
25
7
8

Staff Perspective
◦ Marking a lonely and boring activity – this approach
is anything but
◦ Significant reduction in marking out of class
◦ Quite an intense process
◦ Get to know students
◦ Sensitive to staff absence
◦ Can be quite hard to tell a student to their face
their work is not up to scratch
◦ Feedback must be constructive and positive
◦ Possibly demanding for staff new to teaching / new
to module content

Teaching and Learning
◦ Mechanism is initially alien to both staff and
students – some confusion, conflict and anxiety
◦ Positive impact on plagiarism – ownership of work
◦ Staff and students develop consensus on quality
◦ Moderation of work possibly an issue

Management
◦ Time to plan prior to delivery (not a luxury I had
this time)
◦ Timing of assessments, we need to provide time for
students to reflect and engage – less may well be
more!
◦ Number and nature of credit categories need to be
thought through in advance
◦ Changing grids once teaching has started is a
problem
◦ Collating grades needs addressing
◦ Update of staff data entry

Student Perspective
◦ Students become active participants in assessment
◦ Loud cheer of “yes” when asked if they like this
approach
◦ Reduced impact on loss of work
◦ Not all students engage with the process
◦ (true of whatever we do!)



Carry out remaining research activities
(Focus groups etc.)
Obtain views of non engaging students






Seek the advice of others
Action research
Obtain copies of successful applications
Focus on one topic
Research something you were going to do
anyway
Make it sexy