External Examiners’ Briefing DayAssessment Policy

Tuesday 6th January 2015

UW Assessment Policyhttp://www.worc.ac.uk/aqu/documents/AssessmentPolicy.pdf

“UW believes that assessment is an integral part of effective learning processes, and has established a set of principles for the design and management of assessment practice”.

Please also see the University’s Curriculum Design Policy http://www.worc.ac.uk/aqu/documents/CurriculumDesignPolicy.pdf

Principles of Assessment1. Aligned with learning outcomes and learning activities… 2. Reliable, valid and authentic …3. Enable students to demonstrate that they have met the learning

outcomes… 4. Variety and balance…5. Information…6. Skills and understanding…7. Scheduling…8. Constructive, timely and relevant feedback… 9. Transparent processes and regulations… 10. Annual Evaluation Process (AER)…

Principles of Assessment at Level 4

1. key priority in overall curriculum design process… 2. fundamentally concerned with assessment for learning… 3. promotes provision of timely feedback…4. encourages dialogue and interaction…5. prepares students for the methods and modes of

assessment…6. Ideally provides students with some choice* as to their

mode of assessment…7. enhances aspirational engagement and intrinsic

motivation…

*variable

Formative Assessment

• All courses should have an assessment strategy that includes provision for formative assessments, and all modules/units/course elements should include opportunities for formative assessment; particularly important at Level 4.

NB. Formative assessments do not carry a grade contributing to the final mark or grade for the module; primary purpose is to improve the learning.

Academic Referencing

• All undergraduate courses (with the exception of Psychology which must use the APA referencing system in order to meet British Psychological Society conditions of accreditation) use either Worcester Harvard or Numerical system of academic referencing.

• At PG Level there is no prescribed referencing system

Word Counts

• Guidance should be given to students on the maximum amount that should be written in order that the learning outcomes can be assessed (‘Word Limit’)

• Up to Programme teams to use professional judgement as to whether or not to apply a penalty (e.g. overall grade will be reduced by x) for exceeding a word limit

Submission of Assessment

• Written work can be submitted in electronic or hard copy – currently two institutes (Business and Sport) have predominantly opted for this method

• Nevertheless there is currently flexibility in how staff can require students to submit, even within Course teams

• However we are working towards system of electronic management of assessment

Feedback

Effective and Timely • Effective: commentary on performance identifying

strengths and ways in which improvements can be made. Clear relationship between comments and grade

• Timely: 1. students should have feedback on one assignment

before they submit the next assignment2. feedback on summative assignments should be

provided electronically normally within 20 working days.

Assessment Information

Details of all assessment items and criteria should be included in module outlines, together with the deadline for submission and the date by which students will be able to collect the marked assessment item.

The Generic Grade descriptors • Each grade category is prefaced by a general introductory

statement, followed by a discussion of the approaches to assessment characteristic of work at each grade. Detailed criteria indicating the outcomes normally expected of work at that category follow.

• Please note there is no ‘levelness’ to these descriptors. Courses will still be required to develop grading criteria and descriptors for each item of assessment

• Further information can be accessed through the University web pages by following this link

http://www.worc.ac.uk/aqu/documents/GenericUndergraduateGradeDescriptors.pdfhttp://www.worc.ac.uk/aqu/documents/GradeDescriptorsLevel7.pdf

Generic Undergraduate Grade Descriptors

• Apply to all summatively assessed work within the Undergraduate Regulatory Framework (URF).

• Set out according to the grade system, and mapped on to the conventional categories or sub-divisions of the honours degree in UK Higher Education.

• It should be noted that the grade system is represented by letters rather than numbers and that no numbers are mentioned in the grade descriptors or used in the system.

URF - ExampleGrades B-, B, B+ (Upper second/2:1)

• At B grade, students will be able to develop and sustain a personal judgement within the limits of the task set. It will demonstrate comprehension of the task and synthesise, explain and evaluate the evidence available.

• Outcomes: the work is relevant to the task, and provides a range of responses to it which recognise and command the curriculum requirements. The work demonstrates evidence of ability to synthesise evidence and to assess conflicting interpretations of it to reach an independent coherent resolution. The work is communicated clearly and effectively, using a logical, progressive structure.

Post Graduate Regulatory Framework (PRF) – Example

Grade: Merit (60-69)

• At Merit grade, students will be able to develop and sustain a personal judgement within the limits of the task set. Their work will demonstrate comprehension of the task and synthesise, explain and critically evaluate both the evidence available and the methods by which this evidence was generated. An impressive range of sources relevant to the task will be used, drawing on the latest research and scholarship in the discipline, and these will be located within a critical interpretation of the task.

• Focus is on process as well as outcomes

Issues

• Significant challenge to develop a coherent assessment policy for a course/programme over a number of levels within the confines of a modular scheme

• EEs largely base their report on the evidence of a sample of the assessments they see over a relatively short amount of time

• Therefore the Learning Teaching and Assessment element of the Course is not always apparent , so one can be left to draw conclusions about effectiveness of L T A policy based on summative assessment

Preparation and Guidance

• In your first year get to know the structure, content, learning outcomes of the course or programme

• Consider how effectively the course team communicates its LTA strategy - always helpful to do this from the perspective of a student

• Consider the strategy put in place by the course/programme team to help students achieve the course learning outcomes

• This will help inform judgements about the effectiveness of the assessment type/weighting/feedback etc. at module level