ERG SES C 03, Interactive Poster Session
Interactive Poster Session
International literature points to the need to analyze the impact of different methods of assessment, especially the so-called alternative methods (Sambell & McDowell, 1998), on learning and on academic outcomes and teaching methods in the classroom, since evidence of their effectiveness is still scarce. The emergence of a "new" educational paradigm based on pedagogical reorganization has been discussed, with a focus on greater curricular flexibility, changes in the organization of teaching and learning work, and new forms of assessment (Lima, 2006).These changes were associated with the framework of the Bologna Process, aimed at focusing on training and learning and on the development of students' competencies. Boud (2010, cited by Maxwell, 2012, p. 687) advocates the need for an effective change in the assessment process in HE as universities "face substantial changes in a rapidly evolving global context. The challenges of meeting new expectations about academic standards (...) means that the assessment will have to be rethought and renewed”. According to Struyven et al (2005), traditional exams lead to the tendency for students to learn only for assessment purposes, rather than to maintain and build on the acquired knowledge. In student-centred learning environments, formative assessment plays an important role in assessment for learning (Fernandes, et al. 2014). This kind of assessment fosters the development of autonomy, the sense of responsibility and reflection, influencing the ways in which students engage in their own learning (Pereira, et al., 2015). Thus, it is important to design innovative and creative methods for assessing learning such as portfolios, projects, collaborative assessment and simulations (Struyven, et al.2005; Tang et al. 1999; Almond, 2009; Sambell & McDowell, 1998). The so-called alternative or student-centred methods (Webber, 2012) intend to “improve student performance which has to focus not only on the development of technical competencies but also on the development of transversal competencies” (Fernandes, Flores, & Lima, 2014, p. 163). This implies, amongst other features, autonomy, shared work, project learning (Flores & Veiga Simão, 2007) in the context of highly competitive environments in universities and changes in the conceptions of education (Reimann & Wilson, 2012).The literature also recognizes the need for further research in this field in order to gather data that provide the development of a comparative profile of assessment practices in use in HE institutions in different programs and in different countries. There is a need for better understanding how different methods of assessment influence different perspectives on learning and academic outcomes.
This paper draws on data from a PhD project “The use of alternative methods of assessment in higher education: a study of university teacher and students” funded by the Foundation for Science and Technology (SFRH / BD / 122094/2016) within a larger project titled Assessment in Higher Education: the potential of alternative methods, a 3-year funded project (PTDC/MHCCED / 2703/2014). In this paper university students' perceptions are presented, namely in regard to the ideas associated with assessment, assessment methods most and assessment practices developed in different programs. A mixed-method design was used. Data were collected through a survey and focus group with students and university teachers in Education and Nursing. The questionnaire was applied to all years of the programs. A factor analysis was conducted. The ideas associated with the assessment were grouped in four factors (formative dimension of the assessment; summative dimension of the assessment; negative emotions associated with the assessment process; management of the assessment process). In the assessment methods most used, three factors were found (collective assessment methods; individual assessment methods; portfolios) and an observable variable (written tests/exams). Assessment practices were grouped in five factors (alternative methods of assessment; traditional methods of assessment; justice and effectiveness of assessment; modes of assessment; organization and dedication to the study). Reliability tests were conducted to determine the normality of the distribution. Subsequently MANOVA was used to look at the relationship between the dependent and independent variables in study. In this paper results obtained from the analysis are presented according to gender, age, field of study/program and cycle of studies. Qualitative data were collected through focus groups conducted with students in their last year of the program (Basic Education – 3rd year; Master’s degree in teaching - 2nd year; Nursing – 4th year).
Findings suggest that Education students’ value more the formative dimension of assessment and identify more the negative emotions associated with assessment than Nursing students. Nursing students are used to more individual assessment methods. In contrast, Education students are used to portfolios as an assessment method. Data from the focus groups point to the some degree of participation from the part of the students in the assessment process. These and other issues will be developed further in the paper.
Almond, R. J. (2009). Group assessment: comparing group and individual undergraduate module marks. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 34, no. 2: 141–48. Fernandes, S., Flores, M. A., & Lima, R. M. (2014). Students’ views of assessment in project-led engineering education: findings from a case study in Portugal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 37 (2), pp. 163-178. Flores, M. A., & Veiga Simão, A. M. (2007). Competências desenvolvidas no contexto do Ensino Superior: a perspetiva dos diplomados. In V Jornadas de Redes de Investigación en Docencia Universitaria. Alicante, Espanha, 4-5 junho. Lima, L. C. (2006). Bolonha à Portuguesa? A Página da Educação, Portugal, n. 160, p. 9. Maxwell, T. W. (2012). Assessment in Higher Education in professions: action research as na authentic assessment task. Teaching in Higher Education. London: Routledge, Vol. 17, No. 6, December 2012, 686-696. Pereira, D., Flores, M. A. & Niklasson, L. (2015). Assessment revisited: a review of research in Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. London: Routledge. Reimann, N., & Wilson, A. (2012). Academic development in ‘assessment for learning’: the value of a concept and communities of assessment practice. International Journal for Academic Development, 17(1), 71-83. Sambell, K., & McDowell L. (1998). The values of self and peer assessment to the developing lifelong learner. In Improving student learning – Improving students as learners, ed. C. Rust, 56–66. Oxford, UK: Oxford Center for Staff and Learning Development. Struyven, K., Dochy F., & Janssens S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education: A review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30, no. 4: 331–47. Tang, C., Lai, P., Arthur, D., & Leung, S. F. (1999). How do students prepare for traditional and portfolio assessment in a problem-based learning curriculum? In Themes and Variations in PBL: Refereed proceedings of the 1999 Bi-ennial PBL Conference, Vol. 1, ed. J. Conway and A. Williams, 206–17). Australia: Australia Problem-Based Learning Network (PROBLARC). Webber, K. (2012). The Use of Learner-Centered Assessment in US Colleges and Universities. Research in Higher Education 53 (2), pp. 201-228.
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.