Assessment guidance for staff

UCSD updated its assessment policy and guidance ahead of the start of 2022-23 academic year which all curriculum areas need to adhere to.

The policy and guidance has been widely consulted on.

A working group did the initial research and pooling of resources to make recommendations across the year.
The consultation was shared with other college HE providers who planned to use the consultation with their colleagues.
Student reps gave feedback on 28 April 2022.
All academic staff were invited to give consultation feedback during May 2022, feedback received from three of the four departments.
Finally, the HECs and members of HE team reviewed all the consultation feedback and recommendations to make decisions on the guidance.
The new principles based policy adopted by Governors in June 2022 and the full guidance will be online ready for new academic year https://www.ucsd.ac.uk/student-life/support/assessment-guidance/

The basics that have not changed…

Each programme needs an assessment schedule available on Moodle with both draft and summative assessment dates and arrangements
There must be a request to the Faculty Office (university@) of any changes to module leader (from the PQH) or assessment dates (from the schedule and in consultation with students)
Follow the assessment brief template and guidance within the Module Guide template
Typically two summative assessments per module (spread across the module). Authentic assessments should be the norm.
All assessments must match the element in the PQH
Formative learning will take place in all modules, including the scaffolding of skills to complete the assessment mode
Each assessment has a draft submission at least two weeks before the summative deadline. Timetabled session given over to draft tutorials to give feedback on 25% or 500 words, whichever is greater, and discuss students’ plans for the rest of the assessment to meet the Learning Outcomes. No indication of grade should be given.
No more than one summative submission a week to avoid bunching.
All submissions deadlines, midday on Monday to Thursday during UCSD terms dates (no summative deadlines on Fridays or during the holidays)
An early summative assessment in semester 1 to give students early feedback
All Module Guides and Assessment Briefs must be IQA moderated and the moderation made available to EEs on Moodle by 9 September 2022, prior to the commencement of the academic year
Typically all assessments have a Turnitin submission (e.g. even if just the reference list) to ensure feedback is centrally stored and returned to students
All assessments need to marked, moderated and returned to students within 20 working days
Consistency of assessment approach within a programme team

Practice that has changed…

hese slides have details of the practice that has changed (and the justification for it). A summary of changes is below with links to related document which are held in the HE Hub on SharePoint for staff access:

New principles based Assessment Policy going live for 2022/23.
New Module Guide (including Assessment Brief) templates for 2022/23.
Examples of assessment modes are available on the USCD website for staff and students.
Guidance of what different command verbs mean and how they relate to LOs are on the website.
New Generic Marking Criteria for Level 4, Level 5 and Level 6 to be used to within your Assessment Marking Criteria.
Avoid tests at L4 in case students have not got disability support in place and any reasonable adjustments need to be pre-empted and discussed with the student by the Tutor, any assessment changes need to be documented.
Consistent approach across the programme team for test, open-book, practical, presentation etc. practice and how draft feedback is given.
Draft feedback minimum expectations must be adhered to and consistent.
If a student goes over the word count/time limit by more than 10% the marker will stop marking. This is a change from the percentage grade penalties for infringing the word count.
Support for new staff on assessment practice.

New Assessment Policy 2022/23 principles

Formative, draft and summative assessment
Assessments mapped to Learning Outcomes
Clear purpose, and be valid, reliable and fair
Credit allocated to achieving LOs
Assessment programme will be proportionate and reviewed periodically
Assessment data analysed to help eliminate attainment gaps
Clear regulations, policy and best practice communicated to students
Assessment policy and practice informed by relevant education theory
Policy and practice sensitive to students’ best interests
Assessments aim to be cumulative, integrated and authentic
Process and IT integrated to support learner-centred approaches
Assessment and teaching aligned for deep and mastery learning
Inclusive assessment used to minimise need for additional considerations
Disability Needs Assessment recommend reasonable adjustments will be considered
All assessors given appropriate instruction
Assessment process reviewed by External Examiners
Policies will permit innovation facilitating improvement and sustainability

UCSD’s new generic marking criteria:

Level 4

Level 5

Level 6

Assessment design

Diversity of assessments modes

The mode of assessment relates to the product the student produces within an element e.g.: Element – Coursework, Mode – critical reflection, case study report, portfolio etc.
Diversity of assessment modes which are authentic and reflect future employment should be used.
Online generic guidance for a range of assessment modes will be available to students and academic staff during the 2022/23 academic year.
Expectation of assessment modes should be made explicit by Module Leaders in the assessment briefs and teaching.
Scaffolding of assessment mode skills and opportunities to practice with formative feedback opportunities should be embedded into schemes of learning.
Diversity of assessment modes should also encourage different way of writing and presenting students’ learning.
In late Level 5 or Level 6, a choice of modes of assessment within a module can make the assessment tasks more inclusive.
Assessments will typically be unique each year. After four years an assessment can be recycled.

Here are some example assessment modes:

Credit and word count equivalences

Principles

Word/time limits give students a clear indication of the expectation of effort needed for an assessment.Retain principle of 4000 words for 20 credit modules.
Word count includes everything in the main body of the text (including headings, tables, citations, quotes, lists, etc). The list of references, appendices and footnotes are NOT included in the word count.
Word limits should have ‘plus 10%’ stipulated. Note writing under the word limit is self-limiting thus no need for a minus 10% principle.
The penalties for when students exceed the word limit changing to ‘the marker will not include any work after the maximum word or time limit has been reached within the allocation of marks’.

10 credits equivalances

Coursework – 2000 words

Test/exam – 2 hour

Oral presentation – 15-20 minutes (plus 500 words presentations resource – not marked)

Practical task – Varies depending on curriculum and task – have consistent approach within the programme (IQA)

To find out more about Setting work and time limits for student assessments please visit Leeds Beckett University.

Inclusive assessments

Inclusive Assessments
Inclusive practice and assessment aims, at point of design, to ensure the ways in which we assess does not exclude students (Advance HE, 2019).
Strategies for inclusive practice and assessment from Imperial College, University of Plymouth and UCL.
Diverse assessment diet, careful assessment scheduling, clear guidance and practice opportunities.
Test and exam elements should only be used when appropriate. Consider submitting minor changes for module elements.
Avoid tests and exams in Level 4 as Disability Support might not be in place (similarly Level 6 needs careful consideration due to direct-entry students), particularly in semester 1.
Alternative assessments should be considered e.g. coursework, open-book, take-home tests.
When making tests more inclusive consider the time, location and crucially the questions asked, so that others do not benefit.
Consider offering a limited choice of mode of assessment in late Level 5 or Level 6 (ensure students are familiar with the modes).
Reasonable Adjustments
Inclusive assessment should reduce (or eliminate) the need for reasonable adjustments in most cases.
However, in some cases where a student’s disability will impact on their assessment performance, the Equality Act 2010 requires reasonable adjustments to be put in place.
Students’ Disability Support Plans will detail the suggested reasonable adjustment (but they are suggestions which may not be needed if assessments have been designed inclusively).
Where traditional time-limited tests or exams and verbal presentations remain, personal tutors and students with Disability Support Plans need to discuss the students’ individual needs. This should happen early in the course in preparation for any modules that may have assessments that need reasonable adjustments, and clearly communicated to module leaders.
Module leaders should create individualised reasonable adjustment assessment briefs for named students for transparency.

Reasonable adjustments

Inclusive Assessments
Inclusive practice and assessment aims, at point of design, to ensure the ways in which we assess does not exclude students (Advance HE, 2019).
Strategies for inclusive practice and assessment from Imperial College, University of Plymouth and UCL.
Diverse assessment diet, careful assessment scheduling, clear guidance and practice opportunities.
Test and exam elements should only be used when appropriate. Consider submitting minor changes for module elements.
Avoid tests and exams in Level 4 as Disability Support might not be in place (similarly Level 6 needs careful consideration due to direct-entry students), particularly in semester 1.
Alternative assessments should be considered e.g. coursework, open-book, take-home tests.
When making tests more inclusive consider the time, location and crucially the questions asked, so that others do not benefit.
Consider offering a limited choice of mode of assessment in late Level 5 or Level 6 (ensure students are familiar with the modes).
Reasonable Adjustments
Inclusive assessment should reduce (or eliminate) the need for reasonable adjustments in most cases.
However, in some cases where a student’s disability will impact on their assessment performance, the Equality Act 2010 requires reasonable adjustments to be put in place.
Students’ Disability Support Plans will detail the suggested reasonable adjustment (but they are suggestions which may not be needed if assessments have been designed inclusively).
Where traditional time-limited tests or exams and verbal presentations remain, personal tutors and students with Disability Support Plans need to discuss the students’ individual needs. This should happen early in the course in preparation for any modules that may have assessments that need reasonable adjustments, and clearly communicated to module leaders.
Module leaders should create individualised reasonable adjustment assessment briefs for named students for transparency.

Authentic assessments

Authentic assessments require students to construct or produce something in real-world context, or mimicking the real world:

Realism involves linking knowledge with real life and work
Contextualisation characterizes situations where knowledge can be applied in an analytical and thoughtful way
Problematisation invokes a sense that what is learned can be used to solve a problem or meet a need

The nature of an authentic assessment should limit the risk of academic offence

Principles:

Foundation Degrees integrate academic and work-based learning. Thus, authentic assessments should be the norm.

Enhancing employability by exposing students to activities and problems that they will face in the work place.

Students should be given the knowledge and opportunities to practice the skills to engage in the assessment.

Authentic and unique assessments also reduce the likelihood of a student accidentally or consciously engaging with essay mills.

Guidance on authentic assessments:

Early assessments

Principles

One assessment should be submitted and marked early in all levels of study.
The task should be low stakes e.g. worth 30% of the module, but communicate the importance of doing such a task so that students get early feedback and support.
Marking should be quicker than the usual 20-working days, use additional staff to mark if necessary. Feedback should be returned before students submit their next assessment in their programme.
Feedback should be developmental with guidance and direction to additional support.
Tutors should use the group feedback to develop a structured programme of academic development activities.
Early assessment: University Initiatives that demonstrate innovation in first-year assessment
(Advance HE, 2010)
Early assessment: using a university-wide student support initiative to effect real change
(van Schalkwyk, 2010)

Test, exams and open book assessments

Programme teams should agree on ways of conducting tests, exams and/or open-book assessments so that students have a consistent experience.

Tests

Tests are internally set and marked
Consideration should be given to whether tests are needed and appropriate for assessing the LOs.
Tests should be revised to be inclusive assessments if possible – but what is asked of the students also needs to be reviewed so that additional time does not give advantage to others.

Exams

Exams are usually externally set and/or marked
Where PSRBs require exams (or tests) in a particular format, there is little flexibility for development.
Tutors should meet with students with disabilities early in the course and agree reasonable adjustments for assessments that are not inclusive.

Open-book

University of Plymouth guidance says 48-hour open-book assessments are intended as an ‘inclusive’ alternative, so with no additional time allowances are needed for reasonable adjustments.
Assessments should be designed so that they can be completed in one working day.

Feedback and assessment moderation

Live marking for practical/group tasks

Principles

Practical tasks demonstrate students’ capacity to arrange and present information in a clear, coherent and effective way.
When planned and managed, group work can be an effective way to engage students and can lead to rich learning experiences by encouraging: participation, peer learning, the development of team-working, analytical and cognitive skills, as well as collaborative and organisational skills.
Provide opportunities for students to discuss expectations and practice in a safe environment, for example by building short group presentation activities with discussion and feedback into class time.
Provide clarity about how group marks are allocated, collectively, individually or both, and whether the process or the product is being assessed, or both.
Programme teams should agree on ways of conducting practical and group assessments so that students have a consistent experience.

Oral/practical assessments guidance

Leeds Beckett University (oral assessments planning)
Warwick University (marking scheme for presentations)

Group assessments guidance

Providing formative and draft feedback

Principles

Curriculum areas should agree common practices, adhering to the minimum expectations, across their programmes so that students get a consistent experience.
Formative developmental feedback opportunities should be embedded in the module teaching including assessment for learning.
In most modules, a draft opportunity should be scheduled two weeks before the summative deadline.
Exceptions include dissertation modules when there the draft feedback parameters are set out in the Module Guide and negotiated between the student and supervisor.
Arrangements for draft assessment need to be clearly articulated on Assessment Briefs.
Spelling, punctuation and grammar errors should be highlighted and students directed to HE Study if necessary.

Minimum expectations for Drafts:

Typically two weeks or longer before the summative deadline, draft opportunities should be scheduled.
Students should be encouraged to have an almost completed assessment for the draft, and then highlight the section they want draft feedback on.
Students can have feedback on up to 500 words or 25% (whichever is greater) of the assessment for written feedback within 5-working days.
Students should be offered a one-to-one appointment to discuss their assessment plan and/or their written draft.
Students should be encouraged to reflect on how the draft meets the Assessment Criteria.
No indication of grade should be given by the teaching team on the draft submission.

Providing summative feedback

Minimum expectations

Retain the 20 working-days feedback principle. Typically feedback should be given in Turnitin. Setting Turnitin to release automatically on the 20th day, to create consistent experience.
The OfS (2021) say ‘Providers should assess spelling, punctuation and grammar where this is relevant to the course, subject to compliance with their obligations under the Equality Act 2010 and other legislation. We would expect this to mean that most students on most courses should be assessed on their technical proficiency in written English.’
Feedback should be developmental, explaining what the student has done well, how they can improve their work and setting targets for academic development.
Written feedback on Turnitin can be supplemented by voice messages or feedback tutorials.
In your marking criteria, use the subheadings from the new Generic Marking Criteria and the language from the ‘70-85’ column adapted for the task.

Generic Marking Criteria

Principles

Maintain marking out of 100.
Continued use of common language for each grade band: ‘outstanding’ for over 85%, ‘excellent’ for 70-84%, ‘very good’ for 60-69%, ‘good’ for 50-59%, ‘satisfactory or fair’ for 40-49%, ‘not met or weak or inadequate’ for less than 30-39%, and ‘poor’ for less than 30%.
Each assessment task will have a marking criteria with the new Generic Marking Criteria subheadings linked directly to the task. Generic criteria will be used alongside specific marking criteria for assessments.

Level 4

Level 5

Level 6

Assessment guidance for staff