Transcript Slide 1

Assessment
Staff Development 2011/12
Changes to Assessment for 2011/12
1. New University Marking Scale
2. New Assessment Tool
3. New Student Record System: QLv4
University Marking Scale
•
Letter grades not numbers
•
More intuitive
•
More in line with practices of marking in arts subjects
•
Maps onto the Marking Criteria
•
Modelling suggests no adverse impact on degree calculations
UALv8 2011 (Word)
University of the Arts London
Undergraduate Marking Criteria
Criteria
1 Research
Systematic identification and
investigation of a range of
academic and cultural sources
2 Analysis
Examination and interpretation
of resources
3 Subject Knowledge
Understanding and application
of subject knowledge and
underlying principles
4 Experimentation Problem
solving, risk taking,
experimentation and testing of
ideas and materials in the
realisation of concepts
5 Technical
Competence
Skills to enable the execution of
ideas appropriate to the
medium
6 Communication and
Presentation
Clarity of purpose; skills in the
selected media; awareness and
adoption of appropriate
conventions; sensitivity to the
needs of diverse audiences
7 Personal
and Professional
Development
Management of learning
through reflection, planning, self
direction, subject engagement
and commitment
8 Collaborative and / or
Independent
Professional Working
Demonstration of suitable
behaviour for working in a
professional context alone, or
with others in diverse teams
Level of Achievement Indicators
Fail
F
Little or no information
presented
Marginal Fail
E
Information presented does not
relate sufficiently to the task; there
may be evidence of rudimentary
research
Pass
D
Adequate information has been
gathered and documented from
readily available sources
applying standard techniques
C
Information is accurate,
appropriately categorised and
from a range of sources
B
Well informed judgements made of
the relative value of connected
information from a wide range of
sources
A
Extensive independent research,
accuracy, familiarity with the
material, and sound judgements
F
Little or no evidence of
examination of source material
E
Constituent elements may be
incorrectly identified; analysis
may be attempted but not justified
D
Key elements within relevant
information are identified, but
may lack accurate interpretation
C
Accurate interpretation of the
relationships between
constituent elements
B
Accurate interpretation and
evaluation of relationships between
elements
A
Accurate and perhaps personally
based synthesis and evaluation of
elements
F
Unable to evidence or articulate
basic principles and knowledge
related to the subject
E
Limited knowledge
of the subject and its development
D
Evidence of understanding key
aspects of the subject context,
in current debates and / or
historical background.
References to some relevant
movements / people
C
Accurate understanding of
subject context. References to
key movements and people
B
Accurate, extensive understanding
of subject context.
Evidence of appreciation of the
relative significance of movements
and people
A
Contributes to the subject debate by
assimilating knowledge into a
personal
hypothesis (or elements of / the
beginnings of one)
F
Little or no engagement with
alternative ideas and processes
E
Unable to identify problems; does
not understand the purpose of risk
taking
or exploration of alternatives
D
Operates within familiar and
well established ideas,
processes, media and / or
materials; some evidence of
exploration
C
Evidence of exploration of
processes, media and
materials; may lead to potential
directions for future work
B
Evidence of conceptual risk taking /
using own analysis to inform further
cycles of inquiry
and potential future directions
A
Unfamiliar conceptual territories
may be explored
F
Execution demonstrates poor
judgement and very limited
command of techniques
E
Uses limited rudimentary
processes exercising little
judgement
D
Skills are adequate to
communicate ideas; accepted
conventions and procedures
are usually applied
C
Skills facilitate communication
of ideas; evidence of checking /
testing / finishing; conventions
and procedures are used
consistently and appropriately
B
Skills facilitate practice and the
communication of ideas; full
command of conventions and
procedures is evident
A
Idea and technique are unified.
Discernment and judgement are
evident. Technical / craft skills may
have contributed to conceptual
advances
F
Ineffective use of
visual / oral / written
communication conventions in
the production and presentation
of ideas
E
Partial lack of awareness and
observance of conventions and
standards; lack of clarity in
structure selection and
organisation of information; lack
of awareness of audience
D
Conventions and standards are
applied; structure is clear;
information selection and
organisation shows awareness
of audience requirements and
preferences
C
Communication media have
been selected / used with good
judgement; standards and
conventions of use have been
fully adhered to; decisions show
awareness of the audience and
the context
B
The nature and strengths of
appropriate communication media
have been exploited; information
has been selected, organised
and presented showing awareness
of audience and context
A
Message and medium are unified
with personal style; the
communication is persuasive and
compelling; it takes full account of
diverse audience needs
F
Consistent lack of evidence of
reflection or planning for
learning. No awareness of
personal strengths and
weaknesses in relation to task
E
Sporadic evidence of reflection
and planning for learning but not
followed through consistently.
Incomplete awareness of
personal strengths and
weaknesses
D
Evidence that reflection and
planning have led to increased
subject engagement and
commitment.
Developing an
awareness of strengths and
weaknesses
C
Evidence that a cycle of
reflection and planning has
been iterative and productive.
Actively works to develop
strengths and mitigate
weaknesses
B
Reflection and planning is self
directed, iterative, habitual and
evidenced clearly. Strengths have
been built on, weaknesses have
been mitigated
A
Takes full responsibility for own
learning and development through
iterative cycles of well articulated
purposeful analysis and planning,
supported by extensive evidence
F
Does not collaborate with
others; unproductive working
alone; shows no knowledge of
related profession
E
Collaborates reluctantly; struggles
to produce work alone; has
unrealistic view of professional life
D
Awareness of main standards
required of relevant profession.
Able to work both
collaboratively and
independently
C
Aware of and able to meet most
standards required of relevant
profession in simulated or real
professional situations.
Productive when working in a
team or working alone
B
Aware of and able to meet most
standards required of relevant
profession in simulated or real
professional situations. May work
well in a team, provide effective
leadership, and demonstrate a well
rounded profile working alone
A
Integrates a sense of own identity
productively into real or simulated
professional situations. Can work
comfortably as a team member, in a
leadership role, or alone
University of the Arts London
Undergraduate Assessment Feedback Sheet
Date of Assessment
Date
Assessment Title
Text
Student Name
Course Unit Title / Code
Name of Student
Student ID
AA 000000
Course and College
Course
College
Text
Course Unit Level
0
Assignment / Project Title
Text
Marking Criteria
Level of Achievement
Fail
Pass
Criteria Specific Comments (optional)
Where criteria do not apply, write n/a in the
comments box
Text here
To indicate achievement level, highlight the grey
‘bullet’ in the text box below the relevant grade
and change the font colour to black
Text here
1 Research
Systematic identification and investigation of a range of academic and cultural sources
F
E
D
C
B
A
•
•
•
•
•
•
F
E
D
C
B
A
•
•
•
•
•
•
F
E
D
C
B
A
•
•
•
•
•
•
F
E
D
C
B
A
•
•
•
•
•
•
F
E
D
C
B
A
•
•
•
•
•
•
F
E
D
C
B
A
•
•
•
•
•
•
F
E
D
C
B
A
•
•
•
•
•
•
F
E
D
C
B
A
•
•
•
•
•
•
2 Analysis
Examination and interpretation of resources
3 Subject Knowledge
Understanding and application of subject knowledge and underlying principles
Text here
4 Experimentation
Problem solving, risk taking, experimentation and testing of ideas and materials in the
realisation of concepts
Text here
5 Technical Competence
Skills to enable the execution of ideas appropriate to the medium
Text here
6 Communication and Presentation
Clarity of purpose; skills in the selected media; awareness and adoption of appropriate
conventions; sensitivity to the needs of diverse audiences
Text here
7 Personal and Professional Development
Management of learning through reflection, planning, self direction, subject engagement and
commitment
Text here
8 Collaborative and / or Independent Professional Working
Demonstrates suitable behaviour for working in a professional context alone or with others in
diverse teams
The feedback you are given should be informed by the criteria and should help you plan and
execute work in the future as well as understand how your grade was arrived at. Grades are
arrived at through markers’ holistic judgement informed by the criteria
Marker(s)
Type of Assessment
□ Staff Assessment
□ Self Assessment
□ Peer Assessment
□ Formative
□ Summative
Text here
General comments and advice on how to improve your work in the future
Text
Name(s) of Marker(s)
Signature(s)
Date
Date
UALv8 2011
Grade
This is an indicative grade which is subject to moderation and ratification
by the Board of Examiners.
Internal verification complete / pending / not required(delete text as applicable)
When will the Scale be introduced?
• New scale introduced for all UG and taught PG students enrolling onto a
new course, or a new stage of a course, on or after 1st September 2011.
• Some courses will run out on the old percentage bands and introduce the
new Marking Scale when they start their next academic session (e.g. some
part time courses and any PG courses ending in Spring 2012).
• If you are unsure, please email [email protected].
Assessment Tool
•
Integrated, web-based marking system
•
Custom built for UAL
•
Students access their grades and feedback via Blackboard
•
Feedback is easier to read and more accessible
•
Can also be used for formative assessments and project work
•
Released in two phases
Phase one will allow tutors to:
• Mark formative and summative assessments against the University
Marking Criteria
• Give students clear, accessible and fast electronic feedback.
Phase two will allow tutors to:
• Submit their grades for discussion by the Exam Board.
QLv4 Student Record System
• Unit Grades and Element Grades (where used) entered into QL
• All calculations for Exam Boards automatically generated in standard
report format
• Impact of referrals, compensation etc automatically incorporated into
calculations
Frequently Asked Questions
How is the final mark for the year calculated?
The student grade for the year is calculated in exactly the same way as for the
old percentage scale, as in the following example:
1. A student receives the following unit Letter Grades for the year:
Unit 1 (20 credits)
= AUnit 2 (40 credits)
= BUnit 3 (60 credits)
=A
2. The Letter Grade for each unit has an equivalent point value:
Unit 1 (20 credits)
= 13
Unit 2 (40 credits)
= 10
Unit 3 (60 credits)
= 14
3. The points are weighted according to the credit-rating of the unit:
Unit 1 (20 credits):
13 x (20/120) = 2.167
Unit 2 (40 credits):
10 x (40/120) = 3.333
Unit 3 (60 credits):
14 x (60/120) = 7.000
4. The weighted points for all the units are added together:
Unit 1 =
2.167
Unit 2 =
3.333
Unit 3 =
7.000
Total
5.
12.500
The final grade for the year is rounded to the nearest whole number
(0.50 is rounded up, 0.49 is rounded down):
12.500 becomes 13
13 = A- or 1st Class Honours/ Distinction
How are elements added together?
Where units are divided into weighted elements, the Letter Grades for each
individual element are added together to create the unit Letter Grade, as in the
following example:
1. A unit is made up of 2 assessment elements:
Element 1: Presentation - 20% weighting
Element 2: Essay - 80% weighting
2. The student receives the following grades for each element:
Element 1 (Presentation)
= C+
Element 2 (Essay)
= A3. The Letter Grades are converted to the equivalent point value (on the right
hand side of the UAL Marking Scale):
Element 1 (Presentation)
=9
Element 2 (Essay)
= 13
4. The points are multiplied by the element weighting:
Element 1: 9 x 20%
= 1.8
Element 2: 13 x 80%
= 10.4
5. The weighted points for all the elements are added together:
Element 1: 9 x 20%
1.8
Element 2: 13 x 80%
10.4
Unit Mark
12.2
6. The unit mark is rounded to the nearest whole number (0.50 is rounded up
0.49 is rounded down):
12.2 becomes 12 or B+
Impact on Course Regulations
Borderline Students
Students on the borderlines will be automatically rounded to the next grade/
classification because all unit and final marks are rounded to the nearest
whole number.
There will be no further consideration of borderline students by the exam
board.
Extenuating Circumstances
The adjustment of marks for Extenuating Circumstances will still take place at
unit level. The Board can agree an uplift to the Letter Grade (e.g. B to B+ etc).
Failure
All resubmissions, repeat units and retake years will be capped at D-.
Compensation
The criteria for compensation will remain at no more than 30 credits marginal
failure for progressing UG students. Marginal Failure is represented by an E
Grade.
Academic Misconduct
Academic Misconduct penalties are represented by an F- Grade for the unit,
with any resubmissions or retakes capped at D-.
External Moderation
External Moderation will still take place at either unit or classification level.
The External Examiner can propose a change to the Letter Grades (e.g. all
students on B+ move to A-).