Aims

This case study offers an in-depth exploration of students’ perspectives on a non-traditional form of assessment. It focuses very closely on one particular optional component of the examination used in a final year Economics module. Within this module two examination questions relating to topic areas not formally covered by the lecture-tutorial programme were given to students at the beginning of the academic year. Students could opt to work on one of these questions before the examination and specifically designed support sessions were offered, during which groups of students were asked to pool and share their understanding of key research papers and formally present their findings to a lecturer. This paper investigates students’ reactions to this assessment strategy within the context of the module.

Methodology/research design

The data used were part of a larger data set generated for a UK-wide research project which investigated undergraduate teaching-learning environments in four selected disciplines in close collaboration with lecturers. For this case study data collection took place over two consecutive academic years. During the first year seven semi-structured group as well as one-to-one interviews with a total of 12 students and two one-to-one interviews with staff were conducted in order to establish a baseline understanding of the teaching-learning environment of the module. The second round of interviews focused more specifically on students’ perceptions of the seen examination question and the formal group preparation as well as the reasons influencing their decisions (not) to engage with this component of the assessment. This resulted in eight semi-structured interviews with a total of 13 students. Interpretive analysis of the interview transcripts resulted in the identification of themes. In addition, informal meetings with one of the lecturers as part of the collaborative process contributed to a richer understanding of the lecturer’s perspective and of the field more generally.

Outcomes

The interviews captured a wide variety of perceptions of and approaches to the assessment. Take-up for the seen examination questions was low and the students who did not answer a seen question tended to make workload considerations as well as concerns about groupwork for assessment purposes responsible for their decision. Some of them still engaged in independent groupwork, and despite not participating in the group sessions which were part of the formal curriculum, a few students researched a seen question in conjunction with trusted fellow students or on their own. While the students who undertook this type of independent preparation appeared to act very autonomously, the lack of participation in the group sessions was regarded as disappointing by the lecturer. One of the issues associated with the formal preparation process was the absence of detailed guidance and feedback as this would have compromised the summative function of the examination. The students who answered a seen question developed and/or applied independent learning skills and enjoyed the freedom which the seen exam questions provided, but other students were critical of the way in which their lecturers were trying to regulate and control their autonomy. Contrary to expectations, learners taking a strategic approach to the module were not attracted by the seen questions. The uncertainty of an unfamiliar assessment format and the prospect of undertaking unguided independent research and groupwork were perceived as involving more risks than taking a familiar unseen examination.

Educational and theoretical significance of research

The case study provides insight into the realities of a specific assessment strategy. It contributes to the debate around alternative, less traditional modes of assessment currently used in higher education. and the investigation of student perceptions of assessment which have been stressed as an important area of enquiry within student learning research (Stuyven et al. 2005). By emphasising assessment as lived by students (Sambell and McDowell 1998), it sheds light onto the way in which the students actively interpreted and used, or deliberately decided not to use, the opportunities which it afforded. It also contributes more generally to our understanding of groupwork, peer feedback, learner independence and the role of guidance and feedback in assessment by identifying the issues and dilemmas faced by the students and the lecturers as a result of an assessment strategy which introduces formative elements into a traditional summative examination. It provides insight into the nature of student independence and autonomy (e.g. Candy 1991, Ecclestone 2002) and highlights the importance of self-determination. Commenting on the work of peers and peer dialogue about learning have been identified as one possible way of promoting self-regulation (Nicol and McFarlane-Dick 2006). The findings of the present case study, however, indicate that certain conditions may need to be in place for such peer dialogue to be successful. Structured learning activities set up by the teacher and groupwork used for assessment purposes may even mitigate against constructive peer dialogue if they are not in line with students’ own notions and practices of groupwork.

References

Candy, P. (1991) Self direction for lifelong learning. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Ecclestone, K. (2002) Learning autonomy in post-16 education. London, RoutledgeFalmer

Nicol, D., and McFarlane-Dick, D. (2006) ‘Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice’. Studies in Higher Education 31(2), pp. 199-218.

Sambell, K., and McDowell, L. (1998) ‘The construction of the hidden curriculum: messages and meanings in the assessment of student learning’. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 23(4), pp. 391-402.

Struyven, K., Dochy, F., and Janssen, S. (2005) Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: a review. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 30(4), pp. 325-341.