Assessment Policy Review & Development
Recommendations:
Seek information and opinion on: amount and spread of assessment; types of
assessment; first year experience; engagement with assessment tasks; impact of
assessment on student behaviour; feedback on learning
Seek information on: how existing policy and procedures are interpreted in practice;
disciplinary differences and difficulties with compulsory procedures; workload
associated with summative assessment; constraints and opportunities.
Example of a consultation process used to review UQ assessment policy and questions
for students and staff around their assessment experiences:
1) Focus groups:
Students:
Students were invited to participate in one of four focus groups wherein they
contributed narrative around their experiences with assessment at UQ. Students
were asked questions around the following themes:

First year assessment experiences;

Assessment related issues that arose;

What worked well;

What did not work well; and

How their assessment experience could have been improved.
Academic Staff:
i) Tutors: invited to participate in a focus group wherein they contributed narrative
around their experiences with delivering, describing, marking assessment and
providing feedback and how they were supported to implement the assessment.
Tutors were asked questions around the following themes:
 Assessment experiences (both satisfying and difficult);
 The impact of those experiences;
 Barriers to effective assessment;
 Any other assessment related issues you might wish to raise.
Tutors from across the university were invited to engage in a workshop along
with course coordinators to analyse the raw narrative that came from the focus
groups for themes, issues and opportunities and resolved/unresolved issues.
ii) Course coordinators: invited to participate in focus groups wherein they
contributed narrative around their experiences with the design, implementation
of assessment and the factors that were perceived to support or constrain their
practice. The role of policy in guiding their practice was also explored. Course
coordinators were asked questions around the following themes:
Positive experiences : to describe a program of assessment or piece of
assessment that worked well.

How did that piece or program of assessment come about?

What made it work well? (eg qualities of the assessment)

How did you know it worked well? (for you and for your students)

What helped you to make this assessment experience successful?
Negative experiences: To relate an experience with assessment, where there was
something that constrained or prevented ideal practice.

What did you want to do?

Why did you want to do it?

What stopped or prevented you?

What would have helped to make your experience more successful?
Other assessment issues:
Are there any other issues you wish to raise about assessment?

What are you trying to achieve through assessment?

How do you integrate assessment into your courses?

What sort of assistance does the university provide you around
assessment?

Who or where do you go for advice and guidance about assessment if you
need it?
2) Interviews with long serving academic staff members
Individual interviews were conducted with 7 long-serving academic staff members at
the University of Queensland. The Length of academic appointment at UQ held by
those interviewed ranged from 17 – 28 years.
Themes explored during interviews:
 How has assessment practice changed?
 Factors perceived to contribute to changes in practice
 Attitudes to criterion-referenced assessment
 The student experience today
 Assessment challenges/constraints
 If you could change something about assessment
 Familiarity with UQ Assessment Policy
 How could UQ assessment policy be improved? How should future policy
look?
 Approaches to marking: use of criteria and standards to grade work
 Moderation practices
3) Staff survey on assessment practices at UQ
Course coordinators from across the university were invited to participate in an online staff survey on assessment practices at UQ. The survey explored themes around
staff assessment practices; perspectives on assessment at UQ; definition of criterion
referenced assessment (CRA); perspectives on CRA, how it’s implemented and
confidence levels with implementation of CRA; other comments.
See below for an outline of survey questions.
Staff survey on assessment at the University of Queensland
Purpose of the survey. This survey forms part of an ALTC-funded project entitled
Assessment policy and impact on practice: Sharpening the policy review process in
Australian Universities (PP8-874). The project is led by members of UQ’s Assessment
Sub-committee.
The survey will provide data which will assist the UQ assessment sub-committee in
reviewing assessment policies.
Thank you for participating. By completing this survey you are consenting to the use of
your responses to inform this project. Your responses will remain anonymous.
Human Ethics Clearance: This study adheres to the Guidelines of the ethical review
process of The University of Queensland. Ethics Clearance No.2009000451. Whilst you
are free to discuss your participation in this study with project staff (co ntactable on email
at c.robb@uq.edu.au), if you would like to speak to an officer of the University not
involved in the study, you may contact the Ethics Officer on 3365 3924
Background Information. First, so that we can describe our sample of respondent s,
please indicate the following:
Your Faculty







Arts
BEL
EAIT
Health Sciences
NRAVS
Science
SBS
Your School




































Animal Studies
Architecture
Biological Sciences
Biomedical Sciences
Business
Chemical Engineering)
Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences
Civil Engineering
Dentistry
Earth Sciences
Economics
Education
English, Media Studies and Art History
Geography, Planning and Environmental Management
Health and Rehabilitation Sciences
History, Philosophy, Religion and Classics
Human Movement Studies
Information Technology and Electrical Engineering
Integrative Systems
Journalism and Communication
Land, Crop and Food Sciences
Languages and Comparative Cultural Studies
Law
Mathematics and Physics
Mechanical and Mining Engineering
Medicine
Music
Nursing and Midwifery
Pharmacy
Political Science and International Studies
Population Health
Psychology
Social Science
Social Work and Human Services
Tourism
Veterinary Science
What are the major programs into which you teach?
At what level(s)






do you teach? (You may tick multiple items)
1st year
2nd year
3rd year
4th year
postgraduate coursework
Other (Please specify) ____________________
Assessment Practice: These questions ask what you do in your courses in terms of
assessment
On average, how many assessable items do you set for a #2 course?
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6 or more (Please specify) ____________________
What types of assessment items do you set most frequently? (You may tick multiple
items)
 final exams
 mid semester exams
 in class or online tests or quizzes
 essays
 lab, research or field reports
 portfolios
 oral presentations
 tutorial/class attendance
 tutorial/class/blog participation
 group assignments
 performance or exhibition
 journal or reflective log
 practical competencies
 econference
 case reports
 other (please specify) ____________________
If you set exams, what are the major types of exams/exam questions that you use?
 multiple choice questions
 short answer questions
 essays
 computations
 practical problem solving
 case analysis
 performance
 other (Please specify) ____________________
Do you set any purely formative assessment that provides feedback to students on their
learning without contributing to their final grade?
 No
 Yes
If yes, please describe
In the design and implementation of your assessment, how much are you guided by...
1 = Not at all and 5 Very much …
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Professional accreditation
requirements





The University's Assessment policy
(eg on amount and spread of
assessment)





The University's Graduate Attribute
Policy





Local School policy (eg on amount
and spread of assessment)





3)
4)
5)
1=never; 2 =rarely; 3 = sometimes; 4=usually; 5 = always
How often do you have a colleague or peer within your school...
1)
2)
Review the design of your
assessment and exams





Review your marking and grading





How often do you have a colleague or peer outside your school...
1)
2)
3)
4)
(5)
Review the design of your
assessment and exams





Review your marking and grading





Perspectives on assessment: These questions ask you for your opinion about a range of
assessment issues Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following
statements about assessment:
1= strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neither agree nor disagree; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Class sizes influence my selection
and design of assessment tasks





Class sizes constrain good
assessment





Group work is a useful way to
reduce marking in large classes





Concerns about plagiarism influence
my selection of assessment tasks





Concerns about attrition have
lowered standards





There is pressure not to fail students





More students get higher grades
these days





There is not enough time allowed for
marking at the end of the semester
(8)





I would assess differently if more
resources (eg, tutors) were available





Assessment is adequately resourced





Electronic Course Profiles (ECPs)
provide a useful template for
describing assessment requirements





The UQ policy Assessment (HUPP
3.30. 1) is helpful





More integrated assessment across
courses within a program would be
valuable





We should have less summative
assessment (that contributes to final
grades) and more formative
feedback to students on the
progress of their learning





Students at UQ are over assessed





Students at UQ won't do work
unless it is assessed





The amount and type of assessment
is a factor that influences students'
course selection





Mandatory student evaluations (of
courses and of teaching, ie.
SECaTs) are a disincentive to
innovate in assessment





There's no incentive for innovation in





assessment
I should be able to use 100% final
assessment in my courses if I
prepare students appropriately





There should be constraints on the
number of items of assessment you
can set per course





The policy requiring more than one
type or form of assessment per
course is appropriate





The University provides useful
professional development around
assessment





I have undertaken professional
development around assessment





In 1997, UQ made a policy decision to move to Criterion Referenced Assessment (CRA).
In your own words, tell us briefly what you understand is meant by Criterion Referenced
Assessment.
Implementation: These questions ask about the way you implement CRA .
Think about the criteria you set for your assessment items. How do you describe
standards against which achievement on those criteria will be judged?
 I write explicit standards for each criterion for each assessment piece
(eg High standard: Writes very fluently with a cogent argument ... Low
standard, Weak argument and poor presentation)
 I rely on the University's generic grade descriptors (for grades of 1 to 7)
as the standards for each criterion
 I don't describe standards -- I just give a mark for each criterion
 Other (Please specify) ____________________
How do you aggregate achievement on individual assessment items to determine final
course grades?
 I aggregate individual marks or percentages that map onto the
University's 1 -7 grades
 I aggregate, review or profile individual grades (1-7) that accord with
the University's 1 -7 grades
 I aggregate or review individual achievement on some other
predetermined standards (eg, A to E, Poor to Excellent) and map this
onto the University's 1 - 7 grades.
 Other (Please describe) ____________________
How much you agree or disagree with the following statements about implementation of
CRA?
1= strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neither agree nor disagree; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree
)
5)
Although I use CRA, I still
feel pressured to mark to a
bell curve





I have been required to
adjust final grades that were
based on CRA





If I use CRA and I'm not
satisfied with the grade
distribution, I revise the
criteria and standards before
the next offering of the
course





If I use CRA and I'm not
satisfied with the grade
distribution, I adjust the
grades





Confidence: These questions ask you to indicate how confident you are using CRA As a
UQ course coordinator, how confident are you that you are...
1 = Not at all confident and 5 = Very confident
1
2
3
4
5
Using criterion referenced assessment
to its best advantage?





Identifying appropriate criteria for
assessment tasks?





Setting appropriate standards against
which to determine achievement on
those criteria?





Engaging students with the criteria and
standards you set for your assessment
tasks?





Making assessment judgements that
are transparent to students?





Providing meaningful feedback to
students on their assessment?





Awarding grades for your students that
are consistent with he University's
grade descriptors?





Making assessment judgements that
are consistent from student to student?





Making assessment judgements that
are consistent from year to year?





Making assessment judgements that
are consistent with those of other
assessors in your course(s)?





Making assessment judgements that
are consistent with judgements made in
other courses of a similar discipline/year
level?





Perspectives on CRA: These questions ask you for your opinion about CRA
Please
indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements about CRA as an
approach to assessment (eg as distinct from norm referenced assessment in which
students are assessed against one another on a bell curve).
In my opinion, CRA...
1= strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neither agree nor disagree; 4 = agree; 5 = strongly agree
1
2
3
4
5
2
Discourages competition
between students for grades





Provides students with clear
communication about
assessment expectations





Enhances student motivation
for learning





Makes students more
demanding in terms of
information about assessment





Discourages student originality
and innovation





Increases student anxiety about
addressing assessment
requirements correctly





Provides students with rich
feedback to assist their learning





Improves consistency of
judgements for individual
markers





Improves consistency of
judgements between teams of
markers





Improves the standard of
students' work, overall





Improves the standard of work
for weaker students





Leads to inappropriate grade
inflation





Makes course coordinators
think more carefully about the
design of their assessment





Encourages originality in the
design of assessment





Makes marking too rigid





Prevents holistic judgements
about the standard of an
assessment item (17)





Is fully accepted at UQ





Any Other Comments Please provide below, any other thoughts or comments about
criterion referenced assessment (CRA) and/or the way assessment is implemented at
UQ that you consider would be useful to the UQ Assessment Sub-committee. You may
also use this space to comment on or clarify your responses to any items on this survey.
THANK YOU for completing the survey.
Your responses will be of great assistance to UQ Assessment Sub-committee