View
215
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ANY A [email protected] Lecturer Sport Studies
USING FLIP CAMERA IN ASSESSMENT
OUTCOMES
• To overview the rationale and logistical implementation of a new assessment mechanism with a Year 1 mixed cohort with the aim of improving pass rates.
• To provide some critical reflections of using camera based assessment processes
OVERVIEW
• Year 1 Mixed Cohort of 125 registered students
• Introduction to Sport Management
• 1 Module Coordinator
• High fail rates
• BSc Sport Studies & Joint Honours students- noticeable differences in performance
PREVIOUS CW PERFORMANCES
CW 2008 2009 JH (36) 33% (78) 29% SPS (42) 47% (51) 52%
YEAR 2006 2007 2008 2009
CW/EX CW EX CW EX CW EX CW EX
MEAN 51% 35% 48% 47% 38% 41% 37% 38%
STUDENT NUMBERS
82 131
PPPPREVIOUS PERFORMANCE 2008-2009
ISSUES & ACTIONS
• 15 Credit Module • Previous assessment strategy = 2 x CW & 1 EX
• Timing of Feedback & Assessment Overload?• Increasing numbers
• Minimising Size of Assessment 1 & Incorporating Group Assessment Strategy
• 2009 MEF Video Peer Assessment
• Encouraging contact between student & lecturer
• Developing reciprocity and cooperation among students
• Gives prompt feedback• Emphasises time on task• Respects diverse talents and ways of learning
Chickering & Gamson (1987)
Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick (2005)
• 7 Principles of Good Feedback Practice • Delivers high quality information to students about
learning• Encourage peer dialogue with lecturer• Clarify what good performance is• Facilitate self-assessment• Encourages positivity & self esteem• Closes gap between current & desired performance• Informs teachers to help shape teaching
INTRODUCING FLIP CAMERA
Semester A- used informally with Level 2 ModuleRecord mini lectures/ uploaded to Studynet/ Generic summative assessment feedback clips Control measure in large “ lively” groupsLecturer orientated/focusedIssues with file conversion
Semester BStudent orientated/focus
Gradually introduced to students during workshops over the semester....
Started by recording workshop discussion activity- voice only
Leading up to..... Formative assessment..
SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
• Panel Interview for a Sport Management position of choice
• Group Work – 5 members allocated by Module Coordinator based upon attendance patterns
• 1 Interviewee & 4 Panel Members
• Academic content – leadership theory & management skills
FLIP CAMERA
• Students given option to rehearse interview role play 1 week in advance of summative assessment date.
• Groups were emailed video clip to view performance
• Although uptake was poor- only 2 groups opted
• Consent gained verbally from all members before hand
ASSESSMENT DAY LOGISTICS
• One group performed role play scenario whilst being video recorded and peer assessed by one other group.
• Both groups would agree a peer group mark before providing each other with verbal feedback.
• 126 students allocated into 25 groups of 5 (5x25)
• 19 groups were assessed and 14 recorded ....
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
– Positive feedback was received on lecturer allocation of grouping rather than peer group choices.
– Being videoed revealed differences in attitudes amongst students
– Some juggling of membership but largely group membership adhered to rigorously
– Some students were initially very uncomfortable in presence of camera but became less with more exposure
– Students displayed more professional behaviour patterns in diligence and performance
– Presented professionally- most made effort with dress & appearance
– Average mark higher than initial CW mean ( +6%)
– Novelty factor high
BENEFITS
• 95 students were formatively assessed in the space of 4 hours
• All were given peer group feedback which was agreed /moderated by the lecturer only at point of assessment but not via formal moderation process...
• Efficient & economical use of time for assessment & moderation
• High level of engagement with the assessment process
• Most students groups were accurate in their peer assessments *
• Although some were generous and unwilling to be critical of peers
OUTCOMES• Group CW Mean 47%
• + 7% difference from CW1* – CW2
• 57% increase in CW grade• 26% decrease in CW grade
• 14% (n=17) DNS CW 1• 17% (n=21) DNS CW 2
• (NB* CW1 1000wd individual essay)
OUTCOMES
Lessons Learnt
• More assistance needed with recording assessments.
• Timing- 15 mins allocated x 2 groups, most groups ran over- 30 min time slot in future.
• Issues with file conversion & studynet upload
• Some moderation could also be conducted
• Implement camera from first lecture onwards to increase familiarity.
• Peer group feedback was valuable learning tool
LESSONS LEARNT
• Although easy to use and to record learning events
• Subsequent utilisation and implementation still poses hurdles
• Conversion of media files to those supported by Studynet
• Gaining admin rights to the right software• Once media files uploaded- access depends on
individual student PC system configurations!
AREAS FOR CONCERN
REFERENCES
• Nicol, J & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2005) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. University of Strathclyde