Stephen Bostock, draft 1, 6 Nov 2006
1. An essential part of good assessment is the clarity and transparency of criteria for student performance. Having written the intended learning outcomes and chosen appropriate methods of assessment for them, it is then necessary to clarify what the performance of the outcomes would look like in each particular assessment. These criteria must at least describe the performance needed for the pass mark the behaviour or evidence needed to gain the module credits but because we want students to perform to their best ability they should also describe excellent performance in that assessment. It is further helpful to students to see descriptions of intermediate levels of performance. These descriptions of performance in the assessments being used in a module are derived from the intended learning outcomes and should guide the teaching and support of student learning towards them (thus aligning outcomes, teaching and assessment.)
2. What do good assessment criteria consist of? Firstly they should describe the knowledge, skill or attitude outcomes as they would appear in a particular assessment. Most assessments have several criteria and they need to be distinguished and listed. Secondly, the relative weights (where they exist) for these different criteria in the marking/grading scheme need noting. Thirdly, descriptions of each criterion are needed, at least for an acceptable (pass) performance and an excellent (first class) performance. Ideally, descriptors of some intermediate performances should also be provided.
3. These descriptors are best organized in a grid, with criteria labelling the rows (including their relative weights) and the levels of performance (fail and pass through excellent) labelling the columns. The table cells will contain the descriptions of performance at each level for each criterion (figure 1). There may be several sentences in each cell, to describe the characteristics of a performance against each criterion. At pass level all the descriptions should apply (what is required to pass); at higher levels some descriptions may not apply in every case. For some criteria, descriptions for intermediate levels might amount to partial performances between pass and excellent, or be a quantitative scale between the two. The number of intermediate levels can vary; in general mode levels gives more clarity but not if the descriptions become artificial. It is also helpful to describe a bare fail performance for each criterion, to clarify the bare pass descriptor, thus specifying both what is included and what is excluded in a pass.
A grid may not have mark weightings, or record marks given, if a holistic judgement is being made. Grids can be written flexibly to suit the assessment: they do not impose a structure on the assessment, but they should clarify what structure there is. By doing so they help in reviewing and improving teaching and assessing.
|
Figure 1 |
Bare fail |
Pass |
Good pass |
Excellent |
Marks awarded |
|
Criterion 1 |
· description · .
|
· description · . · . |
· description · . · . |
· description · . · . |
/20 |
|
Criterion 2 |
|
|
|
|
/20 |
|
Criterion 3 (30%) |
|
|
|
|
/30 |
|
Criterion 4 |
|
|
|
|
/30 |
4. Writing such assessment criteria grids is not easy but, once done, they have multiple uses. They clarify the expectations for learning. They provide a common basis for student learning, for teaching and feedback, and for the assessment process. The uses of criteria grids generally include
1. explaining the learning outcomes to students
2. explaining the assessment process to students
3. as a guide when marking student work and creating an overall grade
4. as a feedback sheet explaining both the achievements and shortcomings of a students work elements of descriptions can be highlighted or ticked
5. as a basis for discussion of grades with other markers, moderators and external examiners.
Additional uses might include
6. as a basis for negotiating and refining criteria, with colleagues or with students
7. as a basis for student self assessment
8. as a basis for student peer assessment, formative or summative.
Once a grid has been created its multiple uses mean that it saves staff time by being a tool for teaching and for giving informative feedback quickly, and for marking/moderating.
5. The level of detail that is helpful in a criteria grid for each assessment is a matter of judgement, but it will be considerably more than in the description of the intended learning outcomes being assessed by it. Whatever the level of detail, assessment still needs academic judgement; such grids do not make marking mechanical. (That is only the case with objective tests.) However, academic judgements guided by a fairly detailed exposition of the range of performances against several criteria will be reliable, and informative in feedback. Judging student work is a core academic skill and it needs to be done well. Criteria grids help by keeping the focus on what is important, and help when giving timely, informative feedback and when explaining and, if necessary, justifying a grade given, to students or colleagues.
6. The final grade is not mechanically generated from the table, except in the application of the weighting of each row. Even if weights are not applied to specific criteria, and a holistic judgement is made, the criteria grid is still helpful when marking in keeping the focus on explicit criteria. In more sophisticated marking algorithms, some criteria (rows) may not have weights but might be related to thresholds, gateways, or negative marking (e.g. removal of marks for poor standard of English, at higher academic levels). The criteria/row weights will reflect the assessment algorithm, not impose it.
7. Even if the weighting of criteria is not specified, or the different levels of performance above pass are not clarified (for example, where assessments are pass/fail), tabular lists of criteria are still useful tools for learning, teaching, feedback and assessment (e.g. Figure 2).
|
Figure 2 Assessment grid for assessment Y |
Acceptable performance |
Evidence of performance achieved? |
|
Criterion 1 |
|
|
|
Criterion 2 |
|
|
|
Criterion 3 |
|
|
8. Examples of generic, published grids and subject/assessment specific ones will be made available as models and sources of ideas.