Teaching & Learning in HE
Research Group, Newcastle University
Thursday, 22nd May (12.30- 13.30)
Student-centred learning:
fact or fiction?
Dr Maddalena Taras
maddalena.taras@sunderland.ac.uk
Aims of the session
To think and explore practice
How to make student-centred assessment, learning
and teaching a reality
Challenge each other’s thinking
Do we all agree that...
...we have to understand how we can encourage
active, pro-active learners who are involved in all
aspects of learning, teaching and assessment (LTA)?
...we encourage active, pro-active learners who are
involved in all aspects of (LTA)?
...in order for students to be part of the university
community, students need to understand what we
do, why we do it and how we do it?
Do we do this from the…
…teaching point of view?
If yes, how?
… learning point of view?
If yes, how?
… assessment point of view?
If yes, how?
Teaching and learning discourses
…learner/learning-centred discourses …
AforL and AofL integral, integrated into learning


…learning theories require student voice,
agency, inclusion
Self- and peer assessment
Do your students peer-assess?
Do you think this should be mandatory?
Do your students self-assess?
Do you think this should be mandatory?
Do we all agree that feedback is central to
support learning?
What is Feedback?
Task 1
In twos or threes agree 3 features of feedback
What is feedback?
Is feedback
information
advice
opinion
instruction/order…or………
Feedback
…is a product of assessment
Tutors/peers cannot provide formative feedback
(Formative) feedback is what learners choose to
use
Feedback
...is info, advice etc. which is used
…if/how feedback used depends on learners
“the mind is not a vessel to be filled,
but a fire to be lit”
Plutarch’s fire (c46 -127AD)
Why self-assessment? Support for
mandatory use of self-assessment
Theory Black & Wiliam 2003, 2006, 2009, Sadler 1989, 2010, Taras
2002, 2005, 2010, 2012, 2013b
Empirical research Black & Wiliam 1998, Crooks 1988, Hattie &
Timperley 2007, Natriello 1987
Practice Boud 1995, Cowan 2006, Brown 2013
“I judge the introduction of self-assessment … as the most
powerful factor for change and development that I have yet
encountered.” (Cowan 2006 p111)
“Almost all the teachers mentioned some form of self-assessment
in their plans…the effect of the intervention can be seen to almost
double the rate of student learning” (Wiliam 2007 p1059)
Making assessment explicit
How many self-assessment models are there?
What are they?
Self-assessment models
Looking at differences between two models:
Standard model – default model
(HE in UK, Australia since 1970s)
Self-assessment with integrated tutor/peer
feedback (Taras 2001, 2003, 2008, 2010, 2013)
Commonality of conception of
principles, philosophy





Self-assessment is embedded in reflection and holistic
concepts of learning
for learning, life-long learning, professional
development
learning needs self-assessment for students to be selfdirected
autonomy and independence by becoming more selfreliant
teacher is not the sole authority; many places for
learning support
Standard self-assessment model
Process
 use agreed criteria/standards to assess work
 provide strengths/weaknesses
 provide expected mark (optional)
(Boud 1995, Cowan 2006)
Tutor feeds back on work and self-assessment
Student compares own and tutor assessment
How is Standard Self-assessment model
process learner and learning-centred?
I am going to demonstrate that this is limited
Advantages of Standard model
• understanding of criteria
• students’ reflect on own work
• relate tutor/peer feedback/grade
to own reflection
Good for (self) checking
Disadvantages of Standard model
(in hindsight and mainly from students)








Non-graded work less important to students (tutors?)
Students’ work judged twice
Tutor double assessment load
Students’ “good work” handed in - convinced
Can become a confessional (Reynolds and Trehan
2000, Taras 2003, 2008, Tan 2004)
Vicarious and indirect expertise of grading
Separates tutor/student assessments
Difficult for students to question grades
Making the Standard self-assessment model
learner and learning-centred
Making Standard ssa model learner and
learning-centred?
Disadvantages of Standard model
Removing disadvantages of Standard
model
1. Non-graded work less important
to students (tutors?)
2a. Students’ work judged twice
2b. Tutor double assessment load
3a. Students “good work” handed
in - convinced
3b. Can become a confessional
4. Vicarious and indirect expertise
of grading
5. Separates tutor/student
assessments
6. Difficult for students to question
grades
1. Using summative assessment
tasks
2a. Students’ work judged once
2b. Maintain tutor work load
3a. Students understand worth and
standard of work
3b. Eliminate introspection
4. Provide direct expertise of
grading
5. Tutor/student assessments
united
6.Grades can be discussed on equal
terms
Making Standard ssa model
learner and learning-centred?
Disadvantages of Standard model
Taras’ self-assessment model
1. Non-graded work less important to students
(tutors?)
2a. Students’ work judged twice
b. Tutor double assessment load
1. Uses summative assessment tasks
3. Students “good work” handed in - convinced
b. Can become a confessional
3. Students get understanding of worth of work
4a. Students get vicarious/indirect expertise of
assessment and grading
4. Students get direct expertise of assessment
and grading
Students given own work to consider (2 or 3
weeks later). Then peer discussion/feedback
clarify criteria/standards/feedback
Peer assessment and grading - discussion
Self-assessment and grading
2a. Students’ work judged once
b. Maintain tutor work load
Tutor corrects/grades as normal, feedback +
grade on separate mark sheet
On student work, minimal (underlining) or no
feedback
Tutor collects peer and self-assessment
Then tutor gives students feedback/grades:
Comparison/discussion
5. Separates tutor/student assessments
6. Difficult for students to question grades
5. Tutor/student assessments united
6. Students can question grades
Taras model process: refined,
updated frm student/tutor feedback
Uses graded work
Students re-read own work
Discuss own work and peers’
Peer assessment, feedback, grading
Tutor – (minimal) feedback NO grade
Student’s own feedback, grade
Tutor feedback, grade
Comparisons/discussions
Advantages of model with integrated
peer/tutor feedback
Model trialled in HE in the UK across subject area and
in Secondary education in Sweden
“The results showed that while both conditions benefited
learning, self-assessment with integrated tutor feedback
helped students identify and correct more errors (those
that they or peers had not been aware of) than selfassessment prior to peer or tutor feedback. Interestingly,
this study not only shows the benefits of integrating
external and internal feedback but it also shows ways of
helping students internalise and use tutor feedback”
(Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2005 p9)
“If anything, the guild knowledge of teachers
should consist less in knowing how to evaluate
student work and more in knowing ways to down-load
evaluative knowledge to students” (Sadler 1989 p141)
Advantages of model with integrated
peer/tutor feedback
For Students
 students internalise tutor feedback
 transparency tutor marking/grading
 student double-marker to tutor
 can question process/product
 can approve the tutor mark/ act as own double-marker
 can question any stage of process or product which is not clear
 Grading is very emotive for tutors and learners: can diffuse
grading problems
 feedback enables students to get beyond own perceptions of
merit of their work
Advantages of model with
integrated peer/tutor feedback
For Tutor
 ethical inclusion of students – student-centred
 Does own work BUT students do thinking
 Saves hours in individual tutorials = tutor
telling/justifying themselves
 Failing students alleviated
Disadvantages
Without using standard model – too summative
assessment focused
Research papers on assessment
Self-assessment
Taras, M (2001) The use of Tutor Feedback and Student Self-assessment in Summative Assessment Tasks: towards transparency for
students and for tutors, Assessment & Evaluation in HE, 26(6), 606-614.
Taras, M (2003) To feedback or not to feedback in student self-assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in HE, 28(5), 549-565.
Taras, M. (2008a) Issues of power and equity in two models of self assessment Teaching in HE, 13(1), 81-92.
Taras, M. (2010a) Student Self-assessment: processes and consequences, Teaching in HE, 15(2) 199-213.
Taras, M. (2013) Feedback on Feedback: uncrossing wires across sectors. In: Merry, S., Price, M., Carless, D. and Taras, M. (eds)
Reconceptualising Feedback in HE, London and New York: Routledge.
National/Institutional problems
Taras, M (2002) Using assessment for learning and learning from assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in HE, 27(6), 501-510.
Taras, M. (2006a) Do Unto Others or Not? Lecturers use expert feedback on research articles, why not likewise undergraduates on
assessed work? Assessment and Evaluation in HE, 31(3), 363-375.
Metaphor
Taras, M. (2006b) Debate, discussion and declarations in RI, Research Intelligence Nov 2006
Taras, M. (2007a) Machinations of Assessment: Metaphors, Myths and Realities, Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 15(1) 55-69.
Taras, M. (2007b) Terminal Terminology: the language of assessment” in, Reiss, M., Hayes, R. and Atkinson, A. (Eds.) Marginality and
Difference in Education and Beyond, Trentham Books 52-67.
Assessment Theory: understanding our understandings 2008b, 2013a, 2014
Taras, M (2005) Assessment – SA and FA– some theoretical reflections, British Journal of Educational Studies. 53(3), 466-478.
Taras, M. (2012) Assessing Assessment Theories. Online Educational Research Journal http://www.oerj.org
Taras, M. (2012) Where is the Theory in Assessment for Learning? Online Educational Research Journal http://www.oerj.org
Taras, M. (2012) Back to Basics: definitions and processes of assessments. In: “Didática e Formação de Professores”, Claudio Pinto
Nunes (Ed.), Brazil, Editora Unijai.
Assessment for Learning Theory 2005, 2007a, 2007c, 2008c, 2009a, 2010b, 2012b,
Sectarian Divisions 2007c, 2008b, c, 2009a
Will you all provide me with (anonymous)
feedback please
 Write 3 things you which made you think
 What if anything was new to you?
 Write 3 things you disagree with (and why)
Thank you. Any questions?
maddalena.taras@sunderland.ac.uk
Any questions or comments?
Contact maddalena.taras@sunderland.ac.uk
Self-assessment models
Standard model
Self-marking
“Learning Contract Design” SSA to own
criteria (Cowan 1984, 2006)
Self-assessment with integrated tutor/peer
feedback (Taras 2001, 2003, 2008, 2010)
‘Sound Standard’ model (Cowan (2002)
References
Boud, D. (1986) Implementing Student Self-Assessment Higher Ed. Research and Development Society of
Australia, Sydney.
Boud, D. J.(1991) Implementing Student Self-Assessment, HERDSA Green Guide, 2nd edition, Higher Ed.
Research and Development Society of Australia, Sydney
Boud, D. (1995) Enhancing learning through self assessment London, Kogan Page.
Boyd, H. & Cowan, J. (1985) A Case for Self-Assessment Based on Recent Studies of Student Learning. Assessment
and Evaluation in Higher Education 10(3) 225-235.
Boyd, H. R., Adeyemi-Bero, A. & Blackhall, R. F. (1985) Acquiring Professional Competence through Learnerdirected Learning - an undergraduate perspective (Royal Society of Arts: in Education for Capability.
Occasional Paper 7/.
Cowan, J. (1984) Acquiring Professional Competence through Learning-Directed Learning (Occasional Paper 7,
London, Royal Society of Arts).
Cowan, J. (1988) Struggling with self-assessment, in Boud, D. J. (Ed.) Student Autonomy in Learning London,
Kogan Page.
Cowan, J. (1998) On Becoming an Innovative University Teacher: Reflection in Action, Oxford, OUP.
Cowan, J. (2002) Plus/minus marking: a method of assessment worth considering? The HE Academy.
Cowan, J. (2006) On Becoming an Innovative University Teacher: Reflection in Action (2 Edition) Oxford, OUP.
Nicol, D.J. & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2005) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven
principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2) 199-218.
Reynolds, M. & Trehan, K. (2000) Assessment: a critical perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 267-278.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems Instructional Science, 18, 145165.
Self-assessment (integrated
tutor/peer feedback)
Process
 Uses summative assessment tasks
 With peers, discussion/feedback, clarify criteria and
standards/feedback (tutor supports)
 Tutor gives (minimal) feedback but NO mark/grade
 student mark, peer mark, then tutor feedback and
mark: comparison/discussion
(Taras 2001, 2003, 2008, 2010, 2013)
Student explores/discusses own and peer assessment (tutor
clarifies). Student self-assessment with mark. Tutor
provides mark and feedback.
Conclusion
Theory, empirical research and practice all point to
self-assessment being a mandatory feature for
successful institutional-based learning.
BUT...which model?