FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT FOR ‘GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES’:
TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED LEARNING IN THE FIRST SEMESTER.
Cicely Roche
School of Pharmacy, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
rocheci@tcd.ie
Abstract:
That highlighted outcomes of educational interventions should focus on ‘attributes’, or the related term
professional competencies, is particularly influenced by the writing of Lesley Treleaven and Ranjit
Voola [1] while the focus on outcomes based approaches to student learning (OBASL) derives
primarily from the work of John Biggs [2]. The satisfactory completion of a group exercise during the
first semester of the B.Sc.Pharm degree (Pharmacy) programme in Trinity College Dublin (Trinity) is
the subject of this paper. The group exercise was designed to simultaneously stimulate and review
student understanding of core content introduced early in the degree programme and to align the
programme with the development of graduate attributes such as collaborative learning, team-working
and group decision making. ‘Emerging technologies in Education’, in the form of Wikis, i.e. websites
that allow participants to add, delete and revise content, were utilised in ‘technology enhanced’ pursuit
of these aims. Students were randomly assigned to groups of 7 or 8, and directed to collaboratively
produce a summary of maximum 500 words entitled ‘Roles and responsibilities of community and
hospital pharmacists: Compare and contrast’ by the deadline date. Content delivery took the form of 4
one-hour lectures during the first few weeks of term. Students were introduced to the Moodle Virtual
Learning Environment (VLE) in the context of ethics workshops incorporated into the same module by
the same teacher. Additional support was provided in an online resources folder, including the
material used during the lectures, and online discussion fora, where queries could be discussed, were
also available to students. Of a total of 79 students registered for the programme, 74 completed the
wiki assignment. Wiki activity collectively involved 2526 online actions by the students demonstrating
a rate of 35 online actions per student engaged in the wiki assignment. Following completion of the
assignment, students were invited to complete an anonymous student feedback survey on their
opinion(s) of the wiki exercise. 57% of the eligible students completed the survey.The outcomes of
this anonymous, minimal student feedback survey are reviewed in this paper and will lead to several
changes in how the author uses wikis in online teaching and assessment. The overall conclusion is
that wikis, when appropriately designed into the curriculum, can be used to enhance learning,
Keywords: formative assessment, graduate attributes,
Introduction:
That highlighted outcomes of educational interventions should focus on ‘attributes’, or the related term
professional competencies, is particularly influenced by the writing of Lesley Treleaven and Ranjit
Voola [1] while the focus on outcomes based approaches to student learning (OBASL) derives
primarily from the work of John Biggs [2]. With its emphasis on attributes such as critical thinking and
critical reflection, Biggs’ theory [2], [3] supports professional development in student pharmacists –
especially the development of competencies such as collaboration, teamwork and group decisionmaking. While specific reference of this form of technology enhanced education to the development of
pharmacists will be dealt with in another paper, it is nevertheless important to note the overlap
between graduate attribute development and the professionalization process inherent in pharmacy
undergraduate education.
The satisfactory completion of a group exercise during the first semester of the B.Sc.Pharm degree
(Pharmacy) programme is the subject of this paper. The assessment objective is to encourage
students to engage with ‘Social and Administrative Pharmacy’ early in the academic process as a
basic understanding of pharmacists’ roles and responsibilities was deemed to be a core foundation for
further elements of the programme. The group exercise was designed to simultaneously stimulate
and review student understanding of core content, as introduced early in the degree programme, and
to align the programme with the development of graduate attributes such as collaborative learning,
team-working and group decision making. ‘Emerging technologies in Education’, in the form of Wikis,
i.e. websites that allow participants to add, delete and revise content, were utilised in ‘technology
enhanced’ pursuit of these aims.
It is accepted that the use of any VLE in module and assessment design may create additional
complexities requiring appropriate technical support, attention to access and download issues for
users and quality assurance of assessment strategies such that the integrity of the programme is not
violated. However research suggests that the wiki exercise being evaluated has the potential to
support both the targeted knowledge acquisition and the formation of graduate attribute competencies
in first semester students through appropriate formative and peer assessment that is enhanced by the
use of learning technologies [4], [5], [6], [7].
Biggs [2], [3] envisages that teaching and learning take place in ‘a whole system’, which embraces
classroom, departmental and institutional levels’ and a systems approach to curriculum design
integrates all of these levels in the pursuit of higher level learning. The system governing Higher
Education would include the Institution’s mission (to develop graduates enabled to contribute to
society) as a component part of Biggs’ design. He uses the term ‘constructive alignment’ to
encapsulate meaningful integration, the word ‘constructive’ encompassing the drive to require
students to ‘construct meaning’ through relevant activities with the activities being the catalyst for
learning, whereas the word ‘alignment’ refers to a teacher’s role in setting up and managing the
learning environment in a manner that supports the learning activities.
Such organisation of curriculum around the key challenging, yet significant conceptual areas in
University education are consistent with the learner-centred approach proposed by Land [8]. Toohey
[9] adds consideration of experiential and social critical models which address how students
cognitively process information either individually or collectively, while the potential enhancement of
such a process by groups/peer interaction indicates that social constructivism is a related learning
theory.
It does appear that appropriately facilitated online communities provide scope to identify and support
individuals struggling to engage meaningfully with the group in a more effective manner than when
faced with large numbers of small groups in a classroom scenario [10].
Context:
Pharmacist students access the degree programme through a central applications process open to all
second level students in Ireland.
While prioritisation of knowledge and/or skills acquisition is apparent in the existing approach to
teaching, learning and assessment in the Undergraduate Education in Trinity, innovative and flexible
research-led teaching using methods to encourage student-oriented learning [11] is also listed as a
core institutional value.
A further influence on assessment design is Hegel’s socialisation model of higher education, which
recognises that it’s always in a social setting that I become myself and there can be no learning
without a mirror [12]. This underpins the desirability to include team-working and critical thinking at all
stages of the undergraduate programme in order to develop the generic competencies at the heart of
references to graduate attribute development. Indeed, at a more fundamental level, students in their
first term at University face many challenges, not least of which is the process of socialisation to
University life, and initiatives that support new entrants to establish this University ‘social identity’
address this challenge [7]. To complicate matters further, students entering from second level
education in Ireland are considered to have been exposed to three universal orientations: ‘the bias
towards the technical.... competitive individualism ... and lack of individual autonomy permitted to
students’ (p.101) [13]. Given the high grades required in order to qualify for entry to the Pharmacy
degree, these students are likely to have been competitively individualistic throughout their second
level education.
The module in which this assessment is completed aims to introduce the students to the roles and
responsibilities of pharmacists, the institutions of pharmacy and the organisation of the health service,
while the learning outcomes include that the student will be able to identify the characteristics of a
profession and describe the characteristics of community and hospital pharmacy practice in Ireland.
Methodology:
The wiki completion process:
Having been randomly assigned to wiki groups of 7 or 8 students in the VLE on October 3rd 2011,
students were informed that the assignment was to collectively/collaboratively produce a summary of
no more than 500 words entitled ‘Roles and responsibilities of community and hospital pharmacists:
Compare and contrast’ by the deadline date of November 21st 2011. Additional specific instructions
included that a printed copy, signed by all members of the group, was to be received by the lecturer
by the same deadline and that, in order to be deemed to have satisfactorily completed this element of
the module assessment, each member of the group would also be expected to have contributed at
least one significant suggestion or comment to the formation of the agreed summary on the Wiki.
Content delivery took the form of 4 one-hour lectures. Students were introduced to Moodle, in the
context of ethics workshops incorporated into the same module by the same teacher, thereby seeking
to assure that all students had access to the VLE and the basic technology skills to complete the
assignment. Netiquette guidelines [14], highlighting appropriate behaviour in the online environment,
were included in the ethics workshops. Additional support was provided in a resources folder
containing the presentation material used during the lectures and additional information related to the
topic was uploaded onto Moodle. Online discussion fora, to post queries and seek advice, were
available to students in Moodle.
Of a total of 79 students registered for the course, 74 completed the wiki assignment and four
additional students that joined the course after the starting date of October 3rd, completed the exercise
in paper format only. No percentage marks are assigned to the exercise but students must be
deemed to have completed it to a satisfactory standard.
The wiki exercise evaluation process:
Following submission of the assignment students were invited to complete an anonymous student
feedback survey on their opinion(s) of the wiki assignment. The assessment related to learning
outcomes that rely heavily on social constructivism that takes place in Moodle and are therefore
proposed ‘in the full knowledge that such outcomes pose problems for assessment’. (P.367) [15].
The student questionnaire was designed to reflect ‘Distance Delivery and E-Learning’ as discussed in
Dominique Galloway’s review of whether Kirkpatrick’s model is relevant to this context [16]. while
recognising that time constraints limited the scope for extensive questioning and therefore the number
of questions was limited to 4. The finding [13] that second level students in Ireland are denied
autonomy with respect to directing what and how they should be taught prompted inclusion of freetext
questions designed to specifically encourage critique of the ‘wiki assessment’ methodology at
questions 2 and 3 in Table 1.
Table 1
Ph1006 JF Wiki Assignment Feedback
1. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is 'strongly disagree', 2 is 'somewhat disagree', 3 is 'neither agree
nor disagree', 4 is 'somewhat agree' and 5 is 'strongly agree' please rate the following statements:
a)
A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of encouraging students to review and engage
with the material provided on the topic(s) [hospital and community pharmacist roles and
responsibilities].
b)
A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of encouraging students to develop and
understanding of the roles and responsibilities of hospital and community pharmacist.
c)
A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of encouraging ‘new’ students to become
acquainted with some of their peers
d)
A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of encouraging the development of team-working
skills and group decision-making
e)
A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of assessing student knowledge of the topic(s)
[hospital and community pharmacist roles and responsibilities].
2. What else would you like to feedback regarding your experience of the Wiki assignment for
Ph1006? (Freetext answers)
3. What aspect of the Wiki assignment would you discontinue or change? (Freetext answers).
4. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is 'strongly disagree', 2 is 'somewhat disagree', 3 is 'neither agree
nor disagree', 4 is 'somewhat agree' and 5 is 'strongly agree' please rate whether you think that
the learning objectives outlined for the programme have been achieved:
a)
Describe the roles and responsibilities of community pharmacists in Ireland.
b)
Describe the roles and responsibilities of hospital pharmacist in Ireland.
c)
Describe the characteristics of community pharmacy practice in Ireland.
d)
Describe the characteristics of hospital pharmacy practice in Ireland.
e)
Define ... the characteristics of a profession and explain its professional status.
f)
Outline the regulation of the profession of pharmacy in Ireland.
g)
Outline the organisation of the health services in Ireland as they relate to the practice of
pharmacy in primary and secondary care setting.
An invitation to participate was emailed to each student enrolled in the module as follows:
there is a very short feedback questionnaire on the Wiki assignment found at :
http://www.tcdmoodle.ie/mod/questionnaire/view.php?id=5765
It would be appreciated if you would complete same.
Access to the student feedback survey was closed at the end of term (December 23 rd 2011).
Design of the educational intervention:
Learning outcomes for the module prioritise the cognitive domain but with attention also to the
affective domain (e.g. teamworking competencies).
Pedagogy is based on grounded theory [17], [18] by ensuring relevant content and the appropriate
use of Web 2 technology (Wikis). This aligns with the recommendation that students construct
meaning and knowledge by engaging in appropriate (programme-specific) activities [19], [3] and that
technology can drive learning [7]. Constructivism proposes that learning is an active process that can
take place on an individual or social basis [20]. This assessment inevitably involves social
constructivism in the form of negotiation and active discussion, debate and persuasion as the groups
seek to achieve consensus by the deadline imposed. Participants are exposed to ‘multisource
feedback’ as they are assigned to groups of up to 8 people. Participant engagement in the module,
whether completed individually or in groups, is reviewed for factual accuracy in all elements of the
assessment. Peer debate forces deeper reflection on decisions made, thereby also drawing on
elements of, for example, Kolb’s Learning cycle [21] and restriction of the word-count is designed to
focus the group towards such negotiation rather than each simply adding an account of his/her own
perspective.
Assessment choice was influenced primarily by the core aim of the programme and its related
learning outcomes reflecting social constructivist theories [2], while simultaneously supporting
students as they build knowledge’ of what hospital and community pharmacists do, skills associated
with the use of the VLE and the competencies required for team-working and group decision-making.
It is recognised that the VLE can be an isolated experience for participants especially when group
interaction fails to evolve as anticipated, emphasising that the co-ordination of group activities online
requires skilled and active management. Garrison and colleagues [10], in their model of community
of inquiry, explore effective means of creating a deep and meaningful (collaborative-constructivist)
learning experience through the development of three interdependent elements – social, cognitive
and teaching presence – all employed in this assessment design and it must also be highlighted that,
for some students, the VLE provides a ‘safe communicative space’ [22] of a type not generally
available when students engage ‘face-to-face’.
There are a number of aspects to the decision to include assessment of both individual contributions
(constructivism) and collective decision-making or social constructivism, in the online environment, in
that the focus on groupwork and the VLE do derive validation from the literature. Huball and Burt [23],
emphasise the value of learning communities and cooperative inquiry as used in the wiki while
Sthapornnanon [24] demonstrates that the online environment is an effective social constructivist
learning environment (SCLE). Indeed, an ideal design would develop a structured approach to
formally incorporate synchronous and asynchronous communications and to emphasise ‘netiquette’
guidelines [14], [25] at the outset. Petersen & Bierlein-Palmer [26] indicate that that online students
are more likely to self direct learning in pursuit of problem-solving than the face-to-face students (who
were more likely to wait for the instructor to assist them), while Buelens et al [25] indicate that when
‘didactic guidelines and netiquette’ are provided in the online environment the quality of discussion
improves.
Outcomes/Results:
Outcome of the wiki activity:
Wiki activity collectively involved 2526 online actions by the students, to include both viewing
contributions to their wiki by members of their group and posting contributions to the wiki to which
they had been assigned, demonstrating a rate of 35 online actions per student engaged in the wiki
production assignment. (The four students that completed the assignment face-to-face were
assessed separately). In addition there were 418 individual accesses to the resources indicating an
average of more than 5 actions by each student.
All completed wikis were assessed and group feedback was in the form of a word document,
uploaded to Moodle, which amalgamated all 11 wikis with at least two feedback comments assigned
to each wiki.
In this manner individual group feedback was provided and, at the same time, all students availed of
the feedback given to all members of the cohort of students. Review of the individual contributions to
wiki formation identified that all 74 students had satisfactorily contributed to the exercise and all
completed wikis were assessed as having been to a satisfactory standard. One student failed to
engage in the process and was returned as ‘unsatisfactory’.
Outcome of the student survey:
42 of the eligible 74 students completed the survey giving a completion rate of 57%. Participation in
the survey was optional and responses were entirely anonymous and completed online.
Question 1.
Students were asked to rate, a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is 'strongly disagree', 2 is 'somewhat
disagree', 3 is 'neither agree nor disagree', 4 is 'somewhat agree' and 5 is 'strongly agree' 5
statements provided in the survey, the statements, related ‘key issues’ and average rate responses to
which are summarised in table 2.
Table 2
Average rating assigned by students to statements about the Wiki exercise
Question as posed in the feedback survey:
a A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of encouraging
students to review and engage with the material provided on
the topic(s) [hospital and community pharmacist roles and
responsibilities]
b A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of encouraging
students to develop an understanding of the roles and
responsibilities of hospital and community pharmacist]
c A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of encouraging
‘new’ students to become acquainted with some of their
peers
d A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of encouraging
the development of team-working skills and group
decision-making
e A wiki assignment is an appropriate means of assessing
student knowledge of the topic(s) [hospital and community
pharmacist roles and responsibilities]
Ave
rate
3.4
Key issue(s)
3.3
Develop
understanding
3.5
Socialisation to
University life
3.5
Team-working;
group decision
making
Knowledge
assessment
2.9
Review and
engagement
Key extracts from feedback collated as per ‘key issues’ in Table 2:
a)
Review and engagement
Feedback highlighted that the student view of the wiki format on Moodle might merit review/upgrade
or that an alternate VLE might be preferred for improved functionality:
It would be better if the other students could see who submitted what piece of work so they
could see who has yet to add their piece.
Wiki doesn't respond well to copy and paste from microsoft word which can lead to formatting
issues. For example for my group I decided to delete and retype the whole assignment into
wiki directly to deal with the formatting issue, which took time.
b)
Develop understanding
The quality of the wikis submitted proved to be satisfactory for all groups, compared very positively
with the average standard of assessment submitted by students individually the previous year and
generally reflected an understanding of the roles and responsibilities of hospital and community
pharmacists. Feedback from students, prompted by questions 2 and 3, included comments indicating
that they believed the exercise to have improved understanding e.g. ‘It was successful in helping me
understanding the roles and responsibilities of community and hospital pharmacists’.
However it is acknowledged that this does not provide assurance that all students have individually
developed satisfactory understanding of the material, a sentiment captured by one student’s feedback
that ’In reality, the information is regurgitated and not often engaged with, or understood at all’.
c)
Socialisation to University life
The overall reaction on this question was positive, reflected by the fact that it scored the highest
average rating (3.5) of the five questions posed, comments including that it was a ‘Great way for first
years to meet friends and interact with people in their course’, and ‘Nice way to get to know people in
the course through working together’.
However feedback that ‘I would give more time to the groups to discuss the assignment in the class
as I wasn't sure who everyone in my group was’ also indicated that many students preferred to meet
face-to-face and is an important reminder to the author that the VLE can be an alien environment for
many students. In addition no facility for synchronous communication in the online environment had
been included in the design of this assessment process – an omission that was perceived to be a
short-coming for many participants one of whom highlighted that ‘It was a lot of effort to meet up with
other members of the group to discuss roles and who did what’.
d)
Team-working and group decision making
Many students instinctively recognised the value in developing team-working and group decisionmaking skills as reflected in feedback that ‘The group aspect presented numerous challenges in
delegating responsibility/ communication/editing that I found very educational’ and that [engagement
in the wiki development] was a ‘Great way to develop team work skills and delegation skills’.
However some students expressed dissatisfaction with the requirement to work in teams opining that
‘I wouldn't recommend group work like this as I didn't find it to be effective. Then again this could be
personal preference as I'm quite particular about my work’ and they disliked the decision to allocate
students to groups (rather than each choosing with whom they would work) ‘as not everybody gets
along with some people or are left out of groups that include good friends’.
There were several comments regarding the size of groups being too large and how this added to
organisational issues ‘I would change the amount of people in the groups as I felt that we had
difficulty making sure everyone had a piece to do which would be easier if there were less people in
the group’ and feedback comments also expressed a perception that the imposition of a limited word
count added pressure ‘I would prefer if each person could only write a maximum number of words as
it was difficult to try and keep to 500 or 600 words, when adding your points as other people had
written a lot’.
e)
Knowledge assessment
Relevant ‘learning objectives’ of the module were the focus of question 4 and the average rating
ranged from 3.0 to 3.7 for the 7 learning objectives listed. All were rated at 3 or greater, indicating
that students somewhat agreed that the learning objectives for the programme had been achieved.
Given that this is intended as a formative assessment, in the very early stages of the programme, this
outcome is considered to be satisfactory.
Discussion:
The use of a blended learning approach to teaching and learning has enabled IT skills development
and both diagnostic and formative assessment to begin in the first weeks of the Pharmacy
programme while the ongoing use of the VLE provides a means by which both individual work and
student engagement with other members of their small online group can be stimulated, observed and
assessed.
A mixture of synchronous and asynchronous group discussion experiences facilitates different learner
types [27]. Feedback from the several students indicated that they have a preference for some
synchronous activities in that they reflected the challenges of arranging to ‘meet’ and some frustration
with the fact that team members could amend the wiki even after others in the group had agreed that
the final format was appropriate. This could be accommodated by the addition of chatroom facilities
for students engaged in this module and separation of the cut-off time for wiki formation from the
submission of a signed hardcopy. In this way pedagogies engaging a social-constructivist approach
can align effectively with exercises in the online environment [28] and the student feedback can be
incorporated into future assessment strategies.
Teaching approaches prioritise that group sizes should be small to increase online learning benefits
[24]. Feedback from the students indicated that their preference would be for smaller group sizes
than the 7 or 8 assigned in this exercise. While reduction in group size inevitably increases time input
on assessment, and is therefore a deterrent to implementing this feedback, a reduction in group size
to 5 members could be accommodated by active management of the face-to-face session while
increasing the number of wikis to be reviewed by up to 50%.
Active management of groups includes the need for assurance that activities occur in a timely fashion
and that participants are motivated to contribute at an early stage in the process. Feedback from
participants indicated that there was a certain level of frustration with later-comers to the wiki. Social
networks do pose ethical questions that require review but can generally be appropriately managed
by the use of Netiquette guidelines and skilled facilitation [14]. Netiquette was introduced as a topic in
the first workshop delivered to this student cohort. However this feedback from students’ merits
consideration such that future netiquette guidelines could be more specific about the timing of first
and subsequent contributions.
While the design of the assignment, in requiring a hard copy of the agreed wiki signed by all members
of the group (aimed to assure that each member of the group was satisfied with the contributions by
others in the group), introduced an additional element of peer review to the process several
comments by students alluded to ‘unfairness’ with respect to inequitable levels of effort input by
various students. This is at the core of team-working and the exercise deliberately sought to
introduce this element. However it is also indicative of a short-coming of the current design for
summative assessment purposes.
Some advantages of the online environment are well articulated by Everson [18] in that it enables a
teacher to identify a struggling student more effectively than with groupwork face-to-face and it
facilitates one instructor having more comprehensive insight to multiple group discussions by review
of fora online. The relative ease with which comprehensive feedback could be prepared for this
assignment, while simultaneously supporting late transfers into the course and identifying and
contacting the one student that failed to engage in the assignment, supports this theory.
Conclusions:
Wikis, when appropriately designed into the curriculum, can be used to enhance learning,
Feedback from participants, including those that struggle, must be actively sought if eLearning
strategies are to succeed [16]. The VLE teaching functions are not always transparent in that it can be
difficult to visualise what your students can actually ‘see’ or access and it requires feedback to
crystallise what might (unintentionally) detract from their learning experience [27]. This exercise has
reinforced the value of reflective practice on teaching and learning and, in particular, the role that
feedback from students plays in that process.
Appropriate technical and administrative resources and supports are required to ensure equal access
to resources and activities. Where a student feels/believes themselves to be less competent [26] they
may assume that its ‘them’ and therefore back out. Feedback from the students highlighted that the
author must pay particular attention to netiquette guidelines that prompt timely engagement by all
group members so that those engaging in the early stages do not become prematurely disheartened
with the team-working process.
Digital usage does not equate to literacy. It must be assumed that at least some participants have
difficulty familiarising themselves with the online learning process. Feedback from students engaging
with the wiki indicate that some are more inclined to ‘explore’ the VLE than others and an
understanding of the types of learners typically seen in the online environment helps the teacher
recognise, and potentially assist, disengaged learners. However it is difficult to ‘help’ those who have
difficulties with the VLE when communicating in that same VLE! Early face-to-face sessions must
therefore focus on these critical skills. The feedback from several students that they would rather
meet ‘face-to-face’ reinforces the reality that they have some discomfort with online networking.
Learner comfort with the technologies is particularly important in an exercise that seeks to stimulate
collegiality and peer support in the drive towards team-working and group decision-making. The aim
is to keep the communications simple and depend on stimulating peer review of the wiki contributions
by ensuring the assignment topics are relevant and to ensure that support material and resources are
provided in a timely fashion and supplemented when requested. The absence of specific marks for
this assignment, choosing rather that it be graded as satisfactory in order to successfully complete the
module, facilitates peer support in engaging with the online environment so that the associated skills
can be built gradually. Feedback indicated that some students needed (and availed of) group
member support in this regard.
The technology itself raises concerns. (a) Assessment strategies need to evolve to manage the risk of
plagiarism and impersonation. While efforts to manage this risk have included the confirmation that
each student’s online name is linked to meaningful contributions to the wiki formation, and the
requirement that a hard copy containing each group member’s original signature be submitted as part
of the assessment process, there remains some risk that online impersonation and/or plagiarism will
occur. (b) Technology creates a different communicative space, with a permanent record of all
interactions. Educators have a responsibility to seek to protect these incoming students from naivety
in this regard. (c) The VLE must be adapted to accommodate automation of teaching and learning
where viable. Initial reservations regarding reduction in group size and/or increase in word count
derive at least partly from the time pressures associated with those changes. (d) Strict cut-off times
means there will inevitably be late-comers and the accommodation of these participants, essential
where assessment is involved, can be challenging. In wiki exercises, feedback indicates that one
tardy student can impact on an entire group and the design of the exercise must learn from this
feedback e.g. by separation of wiki submission date from signed/hardcopy submission. (e) It can be
challenging to accommodate ‘repeat’ assessments for individuals when the focus is on group-work.
Acknowledgements:
To colleagues in Trinity College Dublin, Dr. C O’Farrell, CAPSL (Centre for Academic Practice and
Learning) and Dr. M. Woods, CHEST (Community for Higher Education Scholarship in Trinity), for
their helpful conversations during the writing of this paper.
To students in the first year (Junior Freshman) of the B.Sc.(Pharm) Degree in Trinity College Dublin
(2011-2012).
References
[1] Treleaven, L. & Voola, R. (2009) Integrating the Development of Graduate Attributes Through
Constructive Alignment. Journal of Marketing Education.30(2), pp.160-173.
[2] Biggs, J. (2003) Teaching for quality learning at University: What the student does (2 nd Ed.) Open
University Press, Berkshire.
[3] Biggs, J. (2004) Constructing Learning by Aligning teaching: Constructive alignment, In: Teaching
for Quality learning at University. pp. 11-33, 2nd Edition, Berkshire: SRHE and Open University Press.
[4] Hew, Khe Foon & Cheung, Wing Sum. (2011). Student facilitators’ habits of mind and their
influences on higher-level knowledge construction occurrences in online discussions: a case study.
Innovations in Education and Teaching International. August, 48(3) pp.275-285.
[5] Hrastinski, 2009 Hrastinski, Stefan (2009) A theory of online learning as online participation.
Computers and Educaiton. 52 pp.78-82.
[6] Cole, M. (2009) Using Wiki technology to support student engagement: Lessons from the
trenches. Computers and Education. 52 pp.141-146
[7] Nicol, D.. (2009) ‘Assessment for learner self-regulation: enhancing achievement in the first year
using learning technologies. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. June 34(3)pp. 335-352.
[8] Land , R. et al. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (3): implications for
course design and evaluation . Available at:
www.brookes.ac.uk/services/acsld/isl/isl2004/abstracts/conceptual_papers/ISL04-pp53p64pLand-etal.pdf : accessed 13th May 2011
[9] Toohey, S. (2000a) Beliefs, values and ideologies in course design. In: Designing courses for
higher education. Open University Press, Buckingham. pp. 44-69.
[10] Garrison, D. R., Andersen, T. & Archer, W. (2000). Critical Inquiry in a Text-based Environment:
Computer conferencing in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education. 2(2-3), pp.87-105.
[11] Trinity College Dublin. ( 2011). Mission. Available at: http://www.tcd.ie/about/trinity/mission/
Accessed 28/1/2011
[12] Nordenbo, Sven Erik (2002). Bildung and the Thinking of Bildung. Journal of Philosophy of
Education. 36(3), pp. 341-352.
[13] Lynch, K. (1989) The Hidden Curriculum, London: The Falmer Press
[14] Strawbridge, Matthew. (2006). Netiquette: Internet etiquette in the age of the blog. Software
Reference Limited. London.
[15] Hussey and Smith (2003) The uses of learning outcomes: A conceptual analysis. Teaching in
Higher Education, 13(1), pp.107-115.
[16] Gallowey, Dominique L. (2005) Evaluating Distance Deliver and E-Learning: Is Kirkpatrick’s
Model Relevant? Performance Improvement. Apr.44(4), pp. 21-27.
[17] Salmon, G. (2004). E-Moderating: the key to teaching and learning online. 2 nd ed. London: Kogan
[18] Everson, M. (2009) 10 Things I’ve learned about online teaching. Online on:
http://elearnmag.acm.org/archive.cfm?aid=1609990 Accessed on: 12th September 2011.
[19] Bebeau, M.J. & Monson, V.E. (2008). Guided by Theory, Grounded in Evidence: A way forward
for professional ethics education. In: Nucci, L. and Narvaez, D., Eds., Handbook on Moral and
Character Education. New York, NY: Routledge
[20] O Neill, G. (2010) Initiating curriculum revision: Exploring the practices of educational developers.
International Journal for Academic Development. March 15(1), pp. 61-71.
[21] Kolb, 1976
[22] Wicks, P. & Reason, P. (2009) Initiating action research: Challenges and paradoxes of opening
communicative space. Action Research. 7(3), pp. 243-262.
[23] Huball, H. & Burt , H. (2004) An Integrated Approach to developing and Implementing Learning
Centred Curricula. International Journal for Academic Development. May 1(1), pp. 51-65.
[24] Sthapornnanon, N. et al. (2009). Social constructivist Learning Environment in an Online
Professional Practice Course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 73(1):article 10.
[25] Buelens, H. et al. (2007). Electronic discussion forums in medical ethics education: the impact of
didactic guidelines and netiquette. Medical Education. 41: pp. 711-717.
[26] Peterson, S.L. & Bierlein Palmer, L. (2011) Technology Confidence, Competence and Problem
Solving Strategies: Differences within online and Face-to-Face Formats.25(2), pp.1-13.
[27] Vai, M & Sosulski, K. (2011). Essentials of Online Course Design: A standards based Guide.
Routledge. New York.
[28] Elliott, (2009) E-Pedagogy: Does e-learning require a new approach to teaching and learning?