1 / 10

Two-way traffic: transforming assessment practices in Tertiary Education

Two-way traffic: transforming assessment practices in Tertiary Education. Debating the best drivers for transformational change . Steve Draper, Glasgow University David Nicol, Director, REAP project Catherine Owen, Manager, REAP project Heriot Watt University, 31 May 2006.

sagira
Télécharger la présentation

Two-way traffic: transforming assessment practices in Tertiary Education

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Two-way traffic: transforming assessment practices in Tertiary Education Debating the best drivers for transformational change. Steve Draper, Glasgow University David Nicol, Director, REAP project Catherine Owen, Manager, REAP project Heriot Watt University, 31 May 2006

  2. Background: PEW foundation programme • Teaching and learning supported by technology • Goals: reduce costs, improve learning quality • Focus: large first year classes • Readiness criteria (institution/course) • Bids – rigorous procedure, national competition, 30 selected across a range of institutional types • No partnerships required • Outcomes: cost saving (40%), improved learning (20 of 30 projects) • Five models: supplemental, replacement, emporium, buffet and fully online

  3. Background : SFC e-learning transformation • 3 areas: (i) FE-HE transition, (ii) support for students and promotion of effective learning (iii) collaborative content • Goals: new approaches to teaching and learning, embedding, sustainability, measurable benefits to institution and learners. • 26 bids – 6 selected, funding circa £1m • Institutional collaboration required

  4. Background: The REAP Project • 3 HE institutions (Strathclyde, GCU, GU) • Primarily large 1st year classes (160-900) • Goals: transform assessment to support development of learner self-regulation • Expected Outputs: exemplar models of enhanced technology supported assessment • Impact on organisational strategies, structures, processes, roles and responsibilities etc. of changed assessment practices.

  5. Background: Peer Instruction and EVS • Eric Mazur – Harvard • Approach: teaching through questioning with voting and peer discussion • Technology: electronic voting technologies • Goals: address issue of conceptual misunderstanding in science education • Outcome: large rise in learning (standardised tests) • Outcome: massive worldwide take-up of classroom technologies • Led in UK by Jim Boyle, Steve Draper

  6. The pedagogical drivers • Twigg: active learning and personalisation (eg buffet model), constructivist thinking. • REAP: new theorising about assessment – role of student in evaluating own work (LLL), first year experience dissatisfaction (QAA reports) • Peer Instruction: conceptual misunderstandings in specific disciplines, learning for understanding. Constructivist thinking - cognitive development (Piaget) scaffolding (Vygotsky) Q. What role does pedagogy play in promoting transformation? What pedagogical drivers are best?

  7. Level of analysis/intervention • Many levels possible: student, teacher, course team, department, HEI, and national policy level • Twigg: course team level • REAP: course team and organisational level • Peer Instruction: individual teacher level • TESEP: focus is on training students Q. Which level of intervention is likely to be most effective in improving teaching and learning in HE? Justify the reason for your answer.

  8. Learning from across the Atlantic (Pew) • Selection process: rigorous readiness criteria – would change have happened anyway? • Is reducing costs for large first year courses either tenable or desirable? • Focused at course level/what about other levels? • Measurement of change: nationally standardised tests • Dissemination within the programme (among funded course teams) done by CEO (Twigg) not HEIs • Dissemination to the HE sector also by CEO Q. To what extent is the Pew model appropriate to the UK context?

  9. Money as a driver for transformational change • Twigg aimed to save money: realising the potential of ICT. • Money can be a necessary means to an end (e.g. buy equipment) • Money as a motivator for change – e.g. wins intra-institutional arguments • Is reducing costs for large first year courses sensible? • Peer Instruction – no money involved Q. What is the role of money in transformational change?

  10. Questions and discussion What role does pedagogy play in promoting transformation? What pedagogical drivers are best? Which level of intervention is likely to be most effective in improving teaching and learning in HE? Justify the reason for your answer To what extent is the Pew model appropriate to the UK context? What is the role of money in transformational change?

More Related