Inclusive Assessment . . . in relation to your role as an external examiner

1. Inclusive Assessment . . . in relation to your role as an external examiner Pollyanna Magne Educational Developer Programme Director: PGCAP pollyanna.magne@plymouth.ac.uk

2. Motivations to enhance inclusive assessment Assessment is a significant driver of student learning (Brown and Knight, 1994; Ramsden, 1992; O’Donovan et al, 2000) We face a system of assessment that has been subject to slow incremental change, to compromise and to inertia . . . assessment is not sufficiently equipping students to learn. We are failing to prepare students for the rest of their lives.(Boud & Falchikov, 2009) Assessment needs to, motivate and challenge the learner, stimulate thinking and provide feedback. (Price, Rust, O’Donovan and Handley, 2012: 9) Assessment should provide frequent, interactive assessments of student progress and understanding and to stimulate that ‘intrinsic motivation to learn’ (Anon, 2008; Gardner, 2012) Review of National Student Survey results in the UK indicates that universities ‘could do better’ when it comes to assessment and feedback (Magne, 2012: 28)

3. How does inclusivity relate to assessment? • National Union of Students (NUS) states HE needs to improve assessment and feedback • National Student Survey has low scores for assessment & feedback • A review of University of Plymouth assessment (2012) indicated inconsistent practices • Confidence and expectations gap between male and female students (Cotton, 2013) • Attainment gap for minority ethnic groups (Cotton, 2013) • Attainment gap for white working class students (Southern UniversitiesNetwork, 2017)

4. Equality is giving people the same thing(s)Equity is fairness in every situationInclusivity removes the barriers Equality Equity Inclusivity http://culturalorganizing.org/the-problem-with-that-equity-vs-equality-graphic/

5. Moving towards inclusivity • Contingent approach • offersprovision of special arrangements or adjustments within existing systems. • Alternative approach • offers different assessment methods as a bolt-on for a minority of disabled students. • Inclusive approach • is designed to ensure accessibility for all students and reduces the need for Modified Assessment Provision. Waterfield J,. and West, B. (2006). SPACE Project. Plymouth: Plymouth University

6. How does inclusivity relate to assessment? Time for some myth-busting . . . Assessment criteria and standards are set Inclusion does NOT mean adjusting the criteria or standards It is NOT about making assessment easier Inclusive assessment is about designing accessible assessment and the scaffolding to enable students to achieve each assessment to the best of their ability

7. Example of an inclusive assessment task Present your research project proposal to a small audience of subject specialists. The presentation should be 15 minutes, accompanied with 5-10 slides. There will be 5 minutes for questions at the end. • Learning Outcomes: • Outline your research project proposal • Contextualise your research within your discipline • Justify the chosen methodology • Consider the ethics of the project Potential issues with this assessment • High levels of anxiety • Lack of presentation experience • Use of English as an additional language • Speech impediment

8. Example of an inclusive assessment task • Present your research project proposal to a small audience of • subject specialists. The presentation should be 15 minutes, • accompanied with 5-10 slides. There will be 5 minutes for questions at the end. • Learning Outcomes: • Outline your research project proposal • Contextualise your research within your discipline • Justify the chosen methodology • Consider the ethics of the project Inclusive scaffolding • Clear assessment brief • Class time to discuss task • Examples of previous presentations • Input on methodologies • Input on presentation skills / technology • Class time to develop project ideas • Peer group discussion and feedback • Individual support for presentation skills • Peer pairings for dry run and comment • Final presentation (Podcast MAP)

9. Motivations for inclusive assessment at University of Plymouth • 2012 review of the PU assessment indicated inconsistent practices • Student voice states good assessment and feedback is important • Traditionally NSS & SPQ low scores for assessment & feedback • Student retention through learning from regular meaningful assessment tasks and prompt feedback. • Large numbers of disabled students at Plymouth 16.7% (2017/18 CIS) • Disabled Student Allowance reductions in student support in 2015 onwards • Costs of modified assessment provision (MAPs) are high

10. Student voice on feedback (NUS, 2016) ‘The coursework was outdated, and difficult because it lacked industry relevance’ ‘Feedback is often provided within a matter of hours after sending work off for formative marking, meaning students can improve and work on skills needed continuously’ ‘The assessments were vague and unclear leaving me puzzled and confused- I have no idea what makes an A, B or C’. We need formative assessment at the beginning so we can improve in summative assessments’ ‘The coursework guidance was ambiguous’

11. Inclusive Assessment offers a ‘win-win’ approach: • Uses the same assessment for all students • Provides benefits for all students (not just some) • Minimises Modified Assessment Provisions (MAPs) • Reduces staff workload • Uses instant resit if required to reduce the need for campus-based end-of summer exams • Increases student satisfaction

12. Assessment activities . . . Consider assessment types across the programme. • Improvisation • Design & build / model • Create poetry / art • Programme something • Podcast • Literature review • Quiz • Simulation • Group wiki • Website • Poster • Performance • Essay • OSCE / ISCE • Practice / placement • Audio reflection • Scrap book • Critique • Presentation • Observe and reflect • Dissertation / Thesis • Exam: • open book; 24 hour; scenario based; unseen; online; MCQ; student generated To what extent does the programme: use innovative and relevant/authentic assessment? facilitate progression, rehearsal, improvement?

13. Ask the team what makes their course assessment inclusive Check the scaffolding! . . . is this visible in the assignment brief? Feed-in Set up, briefing, preparation, practice, marking criteria • Feed-in Feedback Learning Space end of task, written, verbal, mp3, Utube, marks/grades • Staging of tasks • (progressive & • building complexity) • Formative feedback Feed-forward Formative ‘feedback’, cues, discussion, mid-way reviews, peer & self feedback (P. Magne, 2012)

14. Check that the assessment: • briefs are clear, self-explanatory and available • questions are well-written, clearly structured, avoid ambiguity • criteria measure the stated module learning outcomes • types / format vary across the programme • is authentic / work related / relevant / useful / showcasing • facilitates progression, rehearsal and improvement • includes scheduled time for feed-in / development activity • is limited to a max of 2 assessments per module / avoids overassessment • expectations are reasonable and achievable within the given-time frame • feedback is clear, useful, transferrable • grading is consistent across markers and aligned with FHEQs

15. https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/about-us/teaching-and-learning/inclusivityhttps://www.plymouth.ac.uk/about-us/teaching-and-learning/inclusivity

16. References Ainscow, M. (2007) ‘From special education to effective schools for all: a review of the progress so far’, in Florian, L (ed.) The Sage Handbook of Special Education. London: Sage. Anon (2008). Assessment for learning: formative assessment. Learning in the 21st Century: Research, Innovation and Policy, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. Artiles, A. J., et al. (2006). "Chapter 3: Learning in Inclusive Education Research: Re-mediating Theory and Methods With a Transformative Agenda." Review of Research in Education 30(1): 65-108. Baloche, L. (1994). "Breaking down the walls: integrating creative questioning and cooperative learning into the social studies." The social studies 85: 25-31. Brown, S. and P. Knight (1994). Assessing learners in Higher Education. London, Kogan Page. Chapman, J. and S. Arenson (1993). "Motivation loss in small groups: free riding on a cognitive task." Motivation 119(1): 57-74. Cotton, D., et al. (2010). The gender and ethnicity attainment gap research project: Executive summary. PedRIO paper. Online, University of Plymouth. Fraser, S. and E. Dean (1997). "Why open learning?" Australian Universities Review 1: 25-31 Furnham, A. (1997). The psychology of behaviour at work: the individual in the organisation. UK, Psychology Press. Gardner, J. (2012). Assessment and learning. London, Sage. Harvey, L., S. Moon, et al. (1997). Graduates' work:organisation change and students' attributes. Birmingham, Centre for research into quality. Jessop, T., et al. (2011). "TESTA: Research Inspiring Change." Educational Developments 12(4): 12-16. Magne, P. (2012). "Assessment Equivalent Frameworks: to be or not to be?" Educational Developments 13.1(March 2012): 25-28. Magne, P. and W. Miller (2015). "Inclusive assessment design and delivery in the disciplines." Inclusive Assessment, PedRIO paper 7. Mutch, A. (1998). "Employability or learning? Groupwork in Higher Education." Education and training 40(2): 50-56. Price, M., et al. (2012). Assessment Literacy: The Foundation for Improving Student Learning. Oxford, Oxford centre for staff and learning development. Slee, R. (2001). "'Inclusion in Practice': Does practice make perfect?" Educational Review 53(2): 113-123. Southern Universities Network (2017) White working class males in British higher education: pre and post entry perspectives. Research and advice from nine southern universities. Southern Universities Network Trist, E. (1983). "Referent organisations and the development of interorganisational domains." Human relations 36: 539-550. WaterfieldJ,. and West, B. (2006). SPACE Project. Plymouth: Plymouth University