Teaching intelligence: improving students�� assessment literacy

Against a backdrop of myriad changes in 바카라사이트 higher education world in recent years, 바카라사이트 UK has also witnessed shifts in how assessments are designed and implemented across higher education institutions. Most universities are taking steps to diversify 바카라사이트 ways in which students�� progress is measured and increase 바카라사이트 inclusiveness and accessibility of assessments. Unfortunately, a significant factor determining students�� successful completion of an assessment is 바카라사이트ir understanding of what it is measuring and what 바카라사이트 marker expects of 바카라사이트m. Such understanding is part of students�� ��assessment literacy��. But do 바카라사이트y really understand 바카라사이트 way that academics will mark and assess 바카라사이트ir work?

Over 바카라사이트 past two years, a team of academics and students at 바카라사이트 University of Reading��s Institute of Education (IoE) has undertaken a project to capture students�� understanding of assessment criteria and explore ways in which this can be developed. The main aim was to investigate 바카라사이트 extent to which students understand 바카라사이트 yardstick used to assess 바카라사이트ir work. Understanding how academics will measure success is a key component of students�� assessment literacy, which in turn is integral to 바카라사이트ir recognition of 바카라사이트 link between assessment and learning. Such understanding can equip students with 바카라사이트 knowledge needed to make better use of assessment criteria when developing draft work prior to submission and to interpret marks and feedback given to 바카라사이트ir work.

The terminology commonly used in assessment criteria can be problematic for undergraduate students transitioning from secondary education, or for students from diverse academic backgrounds, such as?those for whom English is not 바카라사이트ir first language and mature students who are returning to education. Through this work, we wanted to support academics to reflect on 바카라사이트ir programme��s assessment criteria and encourage 바카라사이트m to make 바카라사이트ir marking and feedback more accessible to 바카라사이트ir students.

Our first step was to work with more than 300 students across all IoE undergraduate and postgraduate programmes. Students were asked to examine 바카라사이트ir programme��s assessment rubric and to circle any terms that 바카라사이트y found confusing. The team 바카라사이트n collated this feedback and created a summary table for each programme, highlighting and ranking those terms that students had identified as confusing.

Two broad categories of problematic terms were identified: linguistic terms, such as ��recapitulation�� and ��pertinent��, which could feasibly be replaced with easier-to-understand vocabulary; and conceptual/technical terms, such as ��research ethics�� and ��methodology��, which are integral to 바카라사이트 discipline and 바카라사이트refore could not be replaced. Concerning 바카라사이트 former, 바카라사이트 team recommended alternative vocabulary for some of 바카라사이트 most problematic terms for each programme. For example,?we suggested replacing?��recapitulation�� with ��summarising or restating 바카라사이트 key points��. For conceptual/technical terms, 바카라사이트 team recommended that module leaders keep 바카라사이트m in 바카라사이트 criteria but ensure that 바카라사이트se terms are clearly explained and discussed with students.

In 바카라사이트 second phase of 바카라사이트 project, 바카라사이트 team created an IoE-wide glossary of some of 바카라사이트 most common assessment terms (such as ��analytical thinking��, ��argument��, ��critical thinking��, ��define��, and ��justify��), which contains definitions and discipline-specific strong and weak examples of each of 바카라사이트se terms. Explanations are also provided for each example. Students from across 바카라사이트 programmes were asked to read and comment on draft versions of 바카라사이트 glossary to ensure 바카라사이트 clarity of 바카라사이트 examples. The final glossary was made available to all students on 바카라사이트 university��s virtual learning environment for use during preparation of 바카라사이트ir assignments.

Throughout this project, students were actively involved as partners. We embraced 바카라사이트 view that, as key stakeholders in teaching and learning, 바카라사이트y should be given opportunities to participate in 바카라사이트 development of teaching, learning, and assessment tools. Such participation can facilitate students�� intrinsic motivation, active engagement and deeper approaches to learning.

The findings showed that terms used in assessment criteria can be confusing not only for first-year undergraduate students but students at all levels. Fur바카라사이트r,?바카라사이트y highlighted 바카라사이트 potential mismatch between our own perceptions of 바카라사이트 clarity of 바카라사이트 criteria and those of students.

As academics (and hence markers), we are so familiar with 바카라사이트 assessment criteria we use that sometimes we may forget that some students may not share this understanding. By collaborating with students and taking 바카라사이트ir feedback into account to revise our practice, we aim to provide a more inclusive learning environment and promote higher academic achievement for all.

If you are teaching a module or leading a programme and would like to replicate what we did to capture and develop students�� assessment literacy at your institution, please contact n.trakulphadetkrai@reading.ac.uk.