Formative and Summative Assessment and the Notion of Constructive Allignment

This paper discusses perceptions of first year accounting students about their tutorial activities and their engagements in assessment. As the literature suggests, unless participation in learning activities forms part of graded assessment it is often difficult to engage students in these activities. Using an action research model, this paper reports the study of first year accounting students' responses to action-orientated learning tasks in tutorials. The paper focuses on the importance of aligning curriculum objectives, learning and teaching activities and assessment,i.e. the notion of constructive alignment. However, as the research findings indicate, without support at institutional level, applying constructive alignment to facilitate quality student learning outcomes is a difficult task. Thus, the impacts of policy constraints on curriculum issues are also discussed, focusing on the limitations faced by tutors and their lack of involvement in curriculum development.

Harnessing assessment and feedback in the first year to support learning success, engagement and retention

It has been argued that intentional first year curriculum design has a critical role to play in enhancing first year student engagement, success and retention (Kift, 2008). A fundamental first year curriculum objective should be to assist students to make the successful transition to assessment in higher education. Scott (2006) has identified that ‘relevant, consistent and integrated assessment … [with] prompt and constructive feedback’ are particularly relevant to student retention generally; while Nicol (2007) suggests that ‘lack of clarity regarding expectations in the first year, low levels of teacher feedback and poor motivation’ are key issues in the first year. At the very minimum, if we expect first year students to become independent and self-managing learners, they need to be supported in their early development and acquisition of tertiary assessment literacies (Orrell, 2005). Critical to this attainment is the necessity to alleviate early anxieties around assessment information, instructions, guidance, and performance. This includes, for example:  inducting students thoroughly into the academic languages and assessment genres they will encounter as the vehicles for evidencing learning success; and  making expectations about the quality of this evidence clear. Most importantly, students should receive regular formative feedback of their work early in their program of study to aid their learning and to provide information to both students and teachers on progress and achievement. Leveraging research conducted under an ALTC Senior Fellowship that has sought to articulate a research-based 'transition pedagogy' (Kift & Nelson, 2005) – a guiding philosophy for intentional first year curriculum design and support that carefully scaffolds and mediates the first year learning experience for contemporary heterogeneous cohorts – this paper will discuss theoretical and practical strategies and examples that should be of assistance in implementing good assessment and feedback practices across a range of disciplines in the first year.

Assessment by interview and portfolio in a Graduate School Program

Assessment plays an integral role in teaching and learning in Higher Education and teachers have a strong interest in debates and commentaries on assessment as and for learning. In a one-year graduate entry teacher preparation program, the temptation is to emphasize assessment in an attempt to ensure students “cover” everything as part of a robust preparation for the profession. The risk is that, for students, assessment drives curriculum, and time spent in the completion of assignments is no guarantee of either effective learning or authentic preparation for teaching. Interviews as assessment provide an opportunity for a learning experience as well as an authentic task, since students will shortly be interviewing for employment in a “real world” situation. This paper reports on a project experimenting with interview panels as authentic assessment with pre-service early childhood teachers. At the end of their first semester of study, students enrolled in the Graduate Diploma of Education program at the Queensland University of Technology in Australia were required to participate in a panel interview where they were graded by a panel made up of three faculty staff and one undergraduate student enrolled in the four-year Bachelor of Education program. Students and panel members completed a questionnaire on their experience after the interview. Results indicated that both students and staff valued the experience and felt it was authentic. Results are discussed in terms of how the assessment interview and portfolio presentation supports graduating students in their preparation for employment interviews, and how this authentic assessment task has benefits for both students and teaching staff.

High quality/high equity systems of education: Curriculum, teachers and reform in the search for equitable outcomes for all students

The issue of what an effective high quality / high equity education system might look like remains contested. Indeed there is more educational commentary on those systems that do not achieve this goal (see for example Luke & Woods, 2009 for a detailed review of the No Child Left Behind policy initiatives put forward in the United States under the Bush Administration) than there is detailed consideration of what such a system might enact and represent. A long held critique of socio cultural and critical perspectives in education has been their focus on deconstruction to the supposed detriment of reconstructive work. This critique is less warranted in recent times based on work in the field, especially the plethora of qualitative research focusing on case studies of ‘best practice’. However it certainly remains the case that there is more work to be done in investigating the characteristics of a socially just system. This issue of Point and Counterpoint aims to progress such a discussion. Several of the authors call for a reconfiguration of the use of large scale comparative assessment measures and all suggest new ways of thinking about quality and equity for school systems. Each of the papers tackles different aspects of the problematic of how to achieve high equity without compromising quality within a large education system. They each take a reconstructive focus, highlighting ways forward for education systems in Australia and beyond. While each paper investigates different aspects of the issue, the clearly stated objective of seeking to delineate and articulate characteristics of socially just education is consistent throughout the issue.

Curriculum evaluation : approaches and methodologies

Curriculum evaluation, as a field of study, is dynamic. For over the years it has been responsive to the developments in the conceptualization of curriculum and the associated processes of curriculum change. The concept of curriculum is integral to curriculum evaluation and can be defined in terms of what can and shall be taught to whom, when, where, how, and why. Much of the decision making relates to what knowledge is to be selected for inclusion in the curriculum.

Hunters & gatherers : strategies for curriculum mapping and data collection for assurance of learning

Assurance of learning is a predominant feature in both quality enhancement and assurance in higher education. Assurance of learning is a process that articulates explicit program outcomes and standards, and systematically gathers evidence to determine the extent to which performance matches expectations. Benefits accrue to the institution through the systematic assessment of whole of program goals. Data may be used for continuous improvement, program development, and to inform external accreditation and evaluation bodies. Recent developments, including the introduction of the Tertiary Education and Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA) will require universities to review the methods they use to assure learning outcomes. This project investigates two critical elements of assurance of learning: 1. the mapping of graduate attributes throughout a program; and 2. the collection of assurance of learning data. An audit was conducted with 25 of the 39 Business Schools in Australian universities to identify current methods of mapping graduate attributes and for collecting assurance of learning data across degree programs, as well as a review of the key challenges faced in these areas. Our findings indicate that external drivers like professional body accreditation (for example: Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB)) and TEQSA are important motivators for assuring learning, and those who were undertaking AACSB accreditation had more robust assurance of learning systems in place. It was reassuring to see that the majority of institutions (96%) had adopted an embedding approach to assuring learning rather than opting for independent standardised testing. The main challenges that were evident were the development of sustainable processes that were not considered a burden to academic staff, and obtainment of academic buy in to the benefits of assuring learning per se rather than assurance of learning being seen as a tick box exercise. This cultural change is the real challenge in assurance of learning practice.

Developing the Pattern and Structure Assessment (PASA) interview to inform early mathematics learning

The Pattern and Structure Mathematical Awareness Program(PASMAP) stems from a 2-year longitudinal study on students’ early mathematical development. The paper outlines the interview assessment the Pattern and Structure Assessment(PASA) designed to describe students’ awareness of mathematical pattern and structure across a range of concepts. An overview of students’ performance across items and descriptions of their structural development are described.

Parsing the Australian curriculum English : grammar, multimodality and cross-cultural texts

The release of the Australian Curriculum English (ACE) by the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) has revived debates about the role of grammar as English content knowledge. We consider some of the discussion circulating in the mainstream media vis-à-vis the intent of the ACE. We conclude that this curriculum draws upon the complementary tenets of traditional Latin-based grammar and systemic functional linguistics across the three strands of Language, Literature and Literacy in innovative ways. We argue that such an approach is necessary for working with contemporary multimodal and cross-cultural texts. To demonstrate the utility of this new approach, we draw out a set of learning outcomes from Year 6 and then map out a framework for relating the outcomes to the form and function of multimodal language. As a case in point, our analysis is of two online Coca-Cola advertising texts, one each from South Korea and Australia.

Reading in the Australian curriculum English : describing the effects of structure and organisation on multimodal texts

The recently introduced Australian Curriculum: English Version 3.0 (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], 2012) requires students to ‘read’ multimodal text and describe the effects of structure and organisation. We begin this article by tracing the variable understandings of what reading multimodal text might entail through the Framing Paper (National Curriculum Board, 2008), the Framing Paper Consultation Report (National Curriculum Board, 2009a), the Shaping Paper (National Curriculum Board, 2009b) and Version 3.0 of the Australian Curriculum English (ACARA, 2012). Our findings show that the theoretical and descriptive framework for doing so is implicit. Drawing together multiple but internally coherent theories from the field of semiotics, we suggest one way to work towards three Year 5 learning outcomes from the reading/writing mode. The affordances of assembling a broad but explicit technical metalanguage for an informed reading of the integrated design elements of multimodal texts are noted.

A Systems-level approach to building sustainable assessment cultures : moderation, quality task design and dependability of judgement

This paper considers the conditions that are necessary at system and local levels for teacher assessment to be valid, reliable and rigorous. With sustainable assessment cultures as a goal, the paper examines how education systems can support local level efforts for quality learning and dependable teacher assessment. This is achieved through discussion of relevant research and consideration of a case study involving an evaluation of a cross-sectoral approach to promoting confidence in school-based assessment in Queensland, Australia. Building on the reported case study, essential characteristics for developing sustainable assessment cultures are presented, including: leadership in learning; alignment of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment; the design of quality assessment tasks and accompanying standards, and evidence-based judgement and moderation. Taken together, these elements constitute a new framework for building assessment capabilities and promoting quality assurance.

Forging the heteroglossic citizen : articulating local, national, regional and global horizons in the Australian Curriculum

This article offers a discourse analysis comparing selected articles in the national press over the consultative period for Phase 1 subjects in the new Australian Curriculum, with rationales prefacing official Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority documents. It traces how various versions of Australia, its ‘nation-ness’ and its future citizens have been taken up in the final product. The analysis uses Lemke's analytic elaboration of Bakhtin's concept of heteroglossia and its derivative, intertextuality. It identifies a range of intertextual thematic formations around ‘nation’, ‘history’, ‘citizen’ and ‘curriculum’ circulating in the public debates, then traces their presence in official curriculum documents. Rather than concluding that these themes are contradictory and incoherent, the conclusion asks how these multiple dialogic facets of Australian nation-ness potentially offer a better response to complex times than any coherent monologic orthodoxy might.

Researching quality and equity in assessment for improved learner outcomes

Quality and equity issues as they relate to assessment practices and policy are becoming increasingly important as Australia introduces a national curriculum and achievement standards. In a context of high-stakes accountability, concerns regarding equity and quality have important implications for teachers‘ practice for the improvement of learner outcomes. This article is based on three research projects that were conducted over the past four years and were funded by the Australian Federal Government. The research focus, emergent questions, the educational contexts, and the rationale for the studies are discussed prior to the presentation of the analysis of the research findings and the implications for teachers‘ practice and policy reform.

Faculty mentoring, evidence-based assessment, and student learning : an Australian exploration of American initiatives

There have been many improvements in Australian engineering education since the 1990s. However, given the recent drive for assuring the achievement of identified academic standards, more progress needs to be made, particularly in the area of evidence-based assessment. This paper reports on initiatives gathered from the literature and engineering academics in the USA, through an Australian National Teaching Fellowship program. The program aims to establish a process to help academics in designing and implementing evidence-based assessments that meet the needs of not only students and the staff that teach them, but also industry as well as accreditation bodies. The paper also examines the kinds and levels of support necessary for engineering academics, especially early career ones, to help meet the expectations of the current drive for assured quality and standards of both research and teaching. Academics are experiencing competing demands on their time and energy with very high expectations in research performance and increased teaching responsibilities, although many are researchers who have not had much pedagogic training. Based on the literature and investigation of relevant initiatives in the USA, we conducted interviews with several identified experts and change agents who have wrought effective academic cultural change within their institutions and beyond. These reveal that assuring the standards and quality of student learning outcomes through evidence-based assessments cannot be appropriately addressed without also addressing the issue of pedagogic training for academic staff. To be sustainable, such training needs to be complemented by a culture of on-going mentoring support from senior academics, formalised through the university administration, so that mentors are afforded resources, time, and appropriate recognition.

A model for enhancing assessment and teaching practice at the coalface : Insights from a Fellow-In-Residence engagement program

Australian universities are currently engaging with new governmental policies and regulations that require them to demonstrate enhanced quality and accountability in teaching and research. The development of national academic standards for learning outcomes in higher education is one such instance of this drive for excellence. These discipline-specific standards articulate the minimum, or Threshold Learning Outcomes, to be addressed by higher education institutions so that graduating students can demonstrate their achievement to their institutions, accreditation agencies, and industry recruiters. This impacts not only on the design of Engineering courses (with particular emphasis on pedagogy and assessment), but also on the preparation of academics to engage with these standards and implement them in their day-to-day teaching practice on a micro level. This imperative for enhanced quality and accountability in teaching is also significant at a meso level, for according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, about 25 per cent of teachers in Australian universities are aged 55 and above and more than 54 per cent are aged 45 and above (ABS, 2006). A number of institutions have undertaken recruitment drives to regenerate and enrich their academic workforce by appointing capacity-building research professors and increasing the numbers of early- and mid-career academics. This nationally driven agenda for quality and accountability in teaching permeates also the micro level of engineering education, since the demand for enhanced academic standards and learning outcomes requires both a strong advocacy for a shift to an authentic, collaborative, outcomes-focused education and the mechanisms to support academics in transforming their professional thinking and practice. Outcomes-focused education means giving greater attention to the ways in which the curriculum design, pedagogy, assessment approaches and teaching activities can most effectively make a positive, verifiable difference to students’ learning. Such education is authentic when it is couched firmly in the realities of learning environments, student and academic staff characteristics, and trustworthy educational research. That education will be richer and more efficient when staff works collaboratively, contributing their knowledge, experience and skills to achieve learning outcomes based on agreed objectives. We know that the school or departmental levels of universities are the most effective loci of changes in approaches to teaching and learning practices in higher education (Knight & Trowler, 2000). Heads of Schools are being increasingly entrusted with more responsibilities - in addition to setting strategic directions and managing the operational and sometimes financial aspects of their school, they are also expected to lead the development and delivery of the teaching, research and other academic activities. Guiding and mentoring individuals and groups of academics is one critical aspect of the Head of School’s role. Yet they do not always have the resources or support to help them mentor staff, especially the more junior academics. In summary, the international trend in undergraduate engineering course accreditation towards the demonstration of attainment of graduate attributes poses new challenges in addressing academic staff development needs and the assessment of learning. This paper will give some insights into the conceptual design, implementation and empirical effectiveness to date, of a Fellow-In-Residence Engagement (FIRE) program. The program is proposed as a model for achieving better engagement of academics with contemporary issues and effectively enhancing their teaching and assessment practices. It will also report on the program’s collaborative approach to working with Heads of Schools to better support academics, especially early-career ones, by utilizing formal and informal mentoring. Further, the paper will discuss possible factors that may assist the achievement of the intended outcomes of such a model, and will examine its contributions to engendering an outcomes-focussed thinking in engineering education.