Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit.
The Open University have what is probably the most widely-used and robust
marking scale (a fifteen point scale), which allows tutors to mark across
the FULL range of marks. Students are given criteria with their
assessment booklets. Markers may still disagree but the marking scale
offers a framework for agreement. I've used it for many years in Art
History at the OU and am convinced it is better in almost every regard
than percentages. Sadly, most other institutions I've worked at persist
in using percentages, with the implicit and sometimes (as a colleague and
I recently discovered) sometimes explicit ruling not to mark above the low
80s.
Nick
--
Dr Nick Grindle
Senior Teaching Fellow
UCL Centre for the Advancement of Learning and Teaching
Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT
Tel: +44 20 7679 8282 (UCL x48282)
Skype: nickgrindle
On 09/12/2011 00:00, "SEDA automatic digest system"
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>There are 5 messages totaling 1176 lines in this issue.
>
>Topics of the day:
>
> 1. AUTO: Rosamund Woodhouse is out of the office
> 2. Assessment criteria for English Lit (2)
> 3. FW: Assessment criteria for English Lit
> 4. Fwd: Journal of Academic Writing
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 22:03:42 -0500
>From: Rosamund Woodhouse <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: AUTO: Rosamund Woodhouse is out of the office
>
>
>
>I am out of the office from Wed 12/07/2011 until Thu 12/08/2011.
>
>
>
>
>Note: This is an automated response to your message "SEDA Digest - 6 Dec
>2011 to 7 Dec 2011 (#2011-227)" sent on 12/7/2011 7:01:21 PM.
>
>This is the only notification you will receive while this person is away.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:25:23 -0000
>From: John Lea <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Sorry, but I cant resist
>
>Doffing my cap in the direction of Robert Pirsig, Carl Rogers, and Graham
>Gibbs:
>
>a) no student will ever write truly creatively if they are chasing a
>grade;
>b) no student will ever be truly autonomous if they are dependent on a
>grade;
>c) students learn from what you write in feedback, not by the grade you
>give them
>
>But, hey ho, what do I know:
>
>a) jobs and other courses depend on them - in which case well never have
>education for its own sake;
>b) students want grades but cant we tell them to get over themselves?
>c) you must be able to grade when somethings right or wrong but is
>that ever really the case in higher level learning?
>
>Forgive me.
>
>John
>
>John Lea
>Learning and Teaching Enhancement Unit
>Canterbury Christ Church University
>North Holmes Road, Canterbury, CT1 1QU
>Telephone: 01227 767700 ext 3850
>
>PGCLT(HE) administrator:
>Nicky Galer [log in to unmask]
>Telephone: 01227 782952
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Macdonald, Ranald F [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: Wed 12/7/2011 18:08
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>I agree completely about the nonsense of trying to use percentage marking.
>
>In my early days of HE teaching I was course leader for a BTEC Business
>and Finance course and subsequently became an external moderator in many
>FE and HE institutions. The grading scale was Distinction, Merit, Pass
>and Fail, though many people couldn't resist using pluses and minuses.
>We developed clear criteria against a set of descriptors and there was
>little argument about the validity and robustness of the process. As I
>moved more to degree teaching and course leadership I tried to use broad
>marking scales but, other than on the modular programme at the University
>of Derby, everyone was stuck on percentages, leading to endless debates
>at exam boards around the margins. It was seen as more convenient for
>calculating averages and degree classifications and was supposed to
>remove any subjectivity - mmmm.
>
>Ranald
>
>
>Ranald Macdonald SFSEDA, FHEA, NTF
>Emeritus Professor of Academic Development, Sheffield Hallam University
>Higher Education Consultant
>Senior Associate: Professional Development, C-SAP Subject Network
>+44 (0)1629 734307 or 07900 213800 (mobile)
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> and:
>www.ranald.pbworks.com<http://www.ranald.pbworks.com/>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Darren Gash
>[[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 07 December 2011 10:05
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Agreed. I've previously used Middlesex University's 20 point scale, which
>proved to be a good middle ground between the standard classifications
>(too broad) and a percentage scale (too narrow). So, for example, a 2.1
>would be divided up into marks of 8, 7, 6 and 5, where 5 is the highest
>grade. This was also good for students as it provided an incentive to
>improve their performance within a particular classification range
>
>On 7 December 2011 09:47, Elizabeth Cleaver
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>I too use a 15 point scale (although only in my capacity as an external
>examiner at Staffordshire Uni). I think the scale works well and it
>equates easily to the A-F range. However, as Shan points out you need to
>be clear (in your marking criteria) what differentiates a 14 from a 15
>(or an A from and A+) etc. All in all, I think for subjects where there
>is no right or wrong answer, small percentage differences are not
>particularly helpful and the 15 point scale seems to work well.
>
>Elizabeth
>
>Dr. Elizabeth Cleaver
>Head of Learning Development Unit
>Newman University College
>Birmingham,
>B32 3NT
>
>Tel +44 (0)121 476 1181 ext
>2396<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201181%20ext%202396>
>Mob +44 (0)7808 768888<tel:%2B44%20%280%297808%20768888>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Shan Wareing
>Sent: 06 December 2011 23:36
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Hi Janet and everyone
>
>Here at UAL, we've just moved to a 15 point scale using letter grades (A+
>to F-), for reasons including the ones already mentioned (to encourage
>use of the full range of grades, especially at the top end, and to
>discourage long discussions about the difference between 57% and 56%),
>and because most people say the letters are more intuitive to understand
>and travel better (eg when overseas students return home).
>
>We have 8 standard marking criteria, which always have to appear on
>feedback forms but can be marked as 'not applicable' and can be nuanced
>for the assignment and subject area. A matrix indicates achievements at
>each letter band for each criteria, which is built on Bloom, Perry etc,
>and is adapted for the creative visual arts in particular, including
>experimentation and manual skills development.
>
>We've recently had the implementation of the criteria evaluated (the
>evaluation does points out that by moving to institutionalised standard
>practice we were flying in the face of most of the assessment
>literature), which showed a largely positive reception by staff, and we
>saw clear improvements in our assessment ratings in the NSS and
>Postgraduate Experience Student Survey.
>
>An advantage of having a standard feedback form and standardised criteria
>is we can build an online grading and feedback tool which automatically
>populates fields from the student record systems (e.g. course unit code,
>student number), can upload the standard text from the matrix - which can
>be deleted or adapted, and allows the grade entered to be uploaded back
>into the Student Record System, which reduces human error in mark
>transcription, means all percentage & addition calculations, and capping
>for referrals, are done within the SRS, and saves time. The Assessment
>Tool can publish feedback as a PDF in our VLE - we're just in the final
>stages of trialling it in live summative assessments at present.
>
>Details, including the evaluation, are here:
>http://www.arts.ac.uk/assessment/, and the feedback forms & matrix are
>available as downloads here:
>http://www.arts.ac.uk/assessment/resources/downloads/download.html. You
>can't see the online Assessment Tool yet but there is some information
>about it
>
>all the best
>Shan
>
>Dr Shân Wareing
>Dean of Learning and Teaching Development
>University of the Arts London
>272 High Holborn, London WC1V 7EY
>T:020 7514 8051<tel:020%207514%208051> Mobex: 3826
>M: 07725 705026<tel:07725%20705026> E:
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>________________________________________
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf
>Of Strivens, Janet
>[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
>Sent: 06 December 2011 17:34
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Anyone else trying in vain to change the terms of this discussion?
>
>Why do we assume that, because a university requires its grades to be
>reported in percentages and uses 70% to indicate a first class piece of
>work, all disciplines can differentiate between three grades of first
>class to correspond to 70% plus, 80% plus and 90% plus? It seems to me
>that differentiation of quality of work in English literature can be done
>with reasonable inter-rater reliability into four grades plus fail.
>Anything more fine-grained becomes iffy but i could be convinced by the
>evidence for discrimination between upper and lower ends of each grade,
>represented by (say) a mark of 63% and 67% within an upper second class
>grade and ditto with other grades. But discriminating within a range of
>70%-100%? Surely that must be nonsense?
>
>Janet Strivens
>
>PS I am however very interested in what you find out, Jo!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Cooper, Alison
>Sent: 06 December 2011 12:53
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Dear Colleagues
>
>This raises an interesting topic that I am tasked to have some thoughts
>about (my own fault for asking awkward questions)..., around the topic of
>using the 'full range of marks', especially at the top end...
>
>Does anyone have access to any good examples of differentiated criteria
>within the wide 70%/First class /A grade band that seeks to recognise
>that this band is much wider than all the others, and so describes
>different kinds of performance/achievement within that grade band? (any
>discipline, but especially those subjects that often do not use the full
>range). I know it can be a case of semantic inflation - very = 70, very
>very = 80, very very very = 90, but if anyone has anything more
>substantive, I would love to see it.
>
>Also, I would be very interested in examples of assessment tasks that
>invite/encourage the width of performance/achievement possible in the top
>grade.
>
>Hope that makes sense! Thank you for reading this.
>
>
>Ali
>
>Ali Cooper
>Teaching and Curriculum Development Adviser/ Director of Studies for
>Certificate in Academic Practice (CAP)
>Organisation and Educational Development (OED), HR Building, Lancaster
>University, Lancaster LA1 4YW
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> tel:
>(01524 5)10632<tel:%2801524%20%205%2910632>
>Educational Development website: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/celt/celtweb/
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Jo Peat
>Sent: 06 December 2011 12:27
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Dear colleagues
>
>I'd be very grateful if anyone has access to assessment criteria for BA
>English Literature that they think are particularly sound and that they
>would be happy to share. My colleagues on the English Lit degree are
>looking to revise their criteria and are especially interested in more
>categorised criteria for grades above 70% and criteria for groupwork. I
>have some information to share with them, but they're very interested in
>seeing criteria from colleagues at other institutions, if at all possible.
>
>Your help would be very much appreciated.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Jo
>
>Jo Peat
>Senior Lecturer in Learning and Teaching in HE LTEU University of
>Roehampton [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>020 8392 3237<tel:020%208392%203237>
>
>Newman University College, Genners Lane, Bartley Green, Birmingham B32
>3NT ( Registered Office )
>Tel +44 (0)121 476 1181<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201181> Fax +44
>(0)121 476 1196<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201196>
>Newman University College is a charitable company limited by guarantee,
>Registered in England and Wales with Company number : 5493384 Charity
>number : 1110346 VAT number : 559 1908 08
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:47:43 -0000
>From: Andrew Revitt <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: FW: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Here at University Campus Suffolk we use a twelve point grading scale for
>all our undergraduate provision. All assessments achieving all the
>assessment criteria are graded within one of four bands (3, 2:2, 2:1, 1
>for Honours programmes, P, G, M and D for Foundation degrees) along with
>suffixes of -, =, or +. Course teams are expected to provide clear
>grading criteria for students, indicating how grades are arrived at
>explicitly by reference to these criteria within feedback. There is
>variety in how teams approach this, some employing a generic set of
>criteria for each level used on all assessments, others creating criteria
>which are specific for individual assignments. Overall classification is
>based on an averaging of grades weighted in favour of final year studies,
>with a small fudge factor employed when considering the award of Firsts
>(as there is no opportunity to get a grade above 1+, there is no
>equivalent to a student getting a 90% grade to up their average as would
>be possible in percentage systems).
>
>This system is not without its critics in the institution, particularly
>those wedded to percentages, and there are instances where the mechanical
>calculation of classifications using the system can leave colleagues a
>little uncomfortable. There are some areas that present more of an issue
>(exam grading is a particular bug-bear) and I would not describe our
>practice as fully developed. However, on the whole the system is well
>integrated into our courses and operates effectively.
>
>Andrew
>
>__________________________________________________
>Dr Andrew Revitt
>Educational Developer
>Academic Development
>University Campus Suffolk
>Waterfront Building
>Neptune Quay
>Ipswich
>Suffolk
>IP4 1QJ
>Tel. (01473) 338597
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Macdonald, Ranald F
>Sent: 07 December 2011 18:08
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>I agree completely about the nonsense of trying to use percentage marking.
>
>In my early days of HE teaching I was course leader for a BTEC Business
>and Finance course and subsequently became an external moderator in many
>FE and HE institutions. The grading scale was Distinction, Merit, Pass
>and Fail, though many people couldn't resist using pluses and minuses.
>We developed clear criteria against a set of descriptors and there was
>little argument about the validity and robustness of the process. As I
>moved more to degree teaching and course leadership I tried to use broad
>marking scales but, other than on the modular programme at the University
>of Derby, everyone was stuck on percentages, leading to endless debates
>at exam boards around the margins. It was seen as more convenient for
>calculating averages and degree classifications and was supposed to
>remove any subjectivity - mmmm.
>
>Ranald
>
>
>Ranald Macdonald SFSEDA, FHEA, NTF
>Emeritus Professor of Academic Development, Sheffield Hallam University
>Higher Education Consultant Senior Associate: Professional Development,
>C-SAP Subject Network
>+44 (0)1629 734307 or 07900 213800 (mobile)
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> and:
>www.ranald.pbworks.com<http://www.ranald.pbworks.com/>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Darren Gash
>[[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 07 December 2011 10:05
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Agreed. I've previously used Middlesex University's 20 point scale, which
>proved to be a good middle ground between the standard classifications
>(too broad) and a percentage scale (too narrow). So, for example, a 2.1
>would be divided up into marks of 8, 7, 6 and 5, where 5 is the highest
>grade. This was also good for students as it provided an incentive to
>improve their performance within a particular classification range
>
>On 7 December 2011 09:47, Elizabeth Cleaver
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>I too use a 15 point scale (although only in my capacity as an external
>examiner at Staffordshire Uni). I think the scale works well and it
>equates easily to the A-F range. However, as Shan points out you need to
>be clear (in your marking criteria) what differentiates a 14 from a 15
>(or an A from and A+) etc. All in all, I think for subjects where there
>is no right or wrong answer, small percentage differences are not
>particularly helpful and the 15 point scale seems to work well.
>
>Elizabeth
>
>Dr. Elizabeth Cleaver
>Head of Learning Development Unit
>Newman University College
>Birmingham,
>B32 3NT
>
>Tel +44 (0)121 476 1181 ext
>2396<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201181%20ext%202396>
>Mob +44 (0)7808 768888<tel:%2B44%20%280%297808%20768888>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Shan Wareing
>Sent: 06 December 2011 23:36
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Hi Janet and everyone
>
>Here at UAL, we've just moved to a 15 point scale using letter grades (A+
>to F-), for reasons including the ones already mentioned (to encourage
>use of the full range of grades, especially at the top end, and to
>discourage long discussions about the difference between 57% and 56%),
>and because most people say the letters are more intuitive to understand
>and travel better (eg when overseas students return home).
>
>We have 8 standard marking criteria, which always have to appear on
>feedback forms but can be marked as 'not applicable' and can be nuanced
>for the assignment and subject area. A matrix indicates achievements at
>each letter band for each criteria, which is built on Bloom, Perry etc,
>and is adapted for the creative visual arts in particular, including
>experimentation and manual skills development.
>
>We've recently had the implementation of the criteria evaluated (the
>evaluation does points out that by moving to institutionalised standard
>practice we were flying in the face of most of the assessment
>literature), which showed a largely positive reception by staff, and we
>saw clear improvements in our assessment ratings in the NSS and
>Postgraduate Experience Student Survey.
>
>An advantage of having a standard feedback form and standardised criteria
>is we can build an online grading and feedback tool which automatically
>populates fields from the student record systems (e.g. course unit code,
>student number), can upload the standard text from the matrix - which can
>be deleted or adapted, and allows the grade entered to be uploaded back
>into the Student Record System, which reduces human error in mark
>transcription, means all percentage & addition calculations, and capping
>for referrals, are done within the SRS, and saves time. The Assessment
>Tool can publish feedback as a PDF in our VLE - we're just in the final
>stages of trialling it in live summative assessments at present.
>
>Details, including the evaluation, are here:
>http://www.arts.ac.uk/assessment/, and the feedback forms & matrix are
>available as downloads here:
>http://www.arts.ac.uk/assessment/resources/downloads/download.html. You
>can't see the online Assessment Tool yet but there is some information
>about it
>
>all the best
>Shan
>
>Dr Shân Wareing
>Dean of Learning and Teaching Development University of the Arts London
>272 High Holborn, London WC1V 7EY
>T:020 7514 8051<tel:020%207514%208051> Mobex: 3826
>M: 07725 705026<tel:07725%20705026> E:
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>________________________________________
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf
>Of Strivens, Janet
>[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
>Sent: 06 December 2011 17:34
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Anyone else trying in vain to change the terms of this discussion?
>
>Why do we assume that, because a university requires its grades to be
>reported in percentages and uses 70% to indicate a first class piece of
>work, all disciplines can differentiate between three grades of first
>class to correspond to 70% plus, 80% plus and 90% plus? It seems to me
>that differentiation of quality of work in English literature can be done
>with reasonable inter-rater reliability into four grades plus fail.
>Anything more fine-grained becomes iffy but i could be convinced by the
>evidence for discrimination between upper and lower ends of each grade,
>represented by (say) a mark of 63% and 67% within an upper second class
>grade and ditto with other grades. But discriminating within a range of
>70%-100%? Surely that must be nonsense?
>
>Janet Strivens
>
>PS I am however very interested in what you find out, Jo!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Cooper, Alison
>Sent: 06 December 2011 12:53
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Dear Colleagues
>
>This raises an interesting topic that I am tasked to have some thoughts
>about (my own fault for asking awkward questions)..., around the topic of
>using the 'full range of marks', especially at the top end...
>
>Does anyone have access to any good examples of differentiated criteria
>within the wide 70%/First class /A grade band that seeks to recognise
>that this band is much wider than all the others, and so describes
>different kinds of performance/achievement within that grade band? (any
>discipline, but especially those subjects that often do not use the full
>range). I know it can be a case of semantic inflation - very = 70, very
>very = 80, very very very = 90, but if anyone has anything more
>substantive, I would love to see it.
>
>Also, I would be very interested in examples of assessment tasks that
>invite/encourage the width of performance/achievement possible in the top
>grade.
>
>Hope that makes sense! Thank you for reading this.
>
>
>Ali
>
>Ali Cooper
>Teaching and Curriculum Development Adviser/ Director of Studies for
>Certificate in Academic Practice (CAP) Organisation and Educational
>Development (OED), HR Building, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YW
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> tel:
>(01524 5)10632<tel:%2801524%20%205%2910632>
>Educational Development website: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/celt/celtweb/
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Jo Peat
>Sent: 06 December 2011 12:27
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Dear colleagues
>
>I'd be very grateful if anyone has access to assessment criteria for BA
>English Literature that they think are particularly sound and that they
>would be happy to share. My colleagues on the English Lit degree are
>looking to revise their criteria and are especially interested in more
>categorised criteria for grades above 70% and criteria for groupwork. I
>have some information to share with them, but they're very interested in
>seeing criteria from colleagues at other institutions, if at all possible.
>
>Your help would be very much appreciated.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Jo
>
>Jo Peat
>Senior Lecturer in Learning and Teaching in HE LTEU University of
>Roehampton [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>020 8392 3237<tel:020%208392%203237>
>
>Newman University College, Genners Lane, Bartley Green, Birmingham B32
>3NT ( Registered Office ) Tel +44 (0)121 476
>1181<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201181> Fax +44 (0)121 476
>1196<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201196>
>Newman University College is a charitable company limited by guarantee,
>Registered in England and Wales with Company number : 5493384 Charity
>number : 1110346 VAT number : 559 1908 08
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 16:59:17 +0000
>From: "Canning J." <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Much of the problem here is the word 'percentage'. I'm not sure there was
>ever a time when there was an 100 point scale. The 70%+ wasn't used
>much, but neither were scores below about 30. There has not been the same
>move to use the bottom of the 'scale' as there has been to use the top.
>So basically there was/is a 40-50 point scale, not a 100 point scale.
>
>John
>
>Dr John Canning
>Senior Academic Coordinator
>
>LLAS Centre for Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies
>University of Southampton | Avenue Campus | Southampton | SO17 1BJ
>+44 (0) 23 80597526 | @johngcanning | www.llas.ac.uk
>
>
>Follow LLAS on Twitter! http://twitter.com/LLASCentre
>
>To receive our monthly e-bulletin, please register at:
>http://www.llas.ac.uk/mailinglist
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Andrew Revitt
>Sent: 08 December 2011 09:48
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: FW: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Here at University Campus Suffolk we use a twelve point grading scale for
>all our undergraduate provision. All assessments achieving all the
>assessment criteria are graded within one of four bands (3, 2:2, 2:1, 1
>for Honours programmes, P, G, M and D for Foundation degrees) along with
>suffixes of -, =, or +. Course teams are expected to provide clear
>grading criteria for students, indicating how grades are arrived at
>explicitly by reference to these criteria within feedback. There is
>variety in how teams approach this, some employing a generic set of
>criteria for each level used on all assessments, others creating criteria
>which are specific for individual assignments. Overall classification is
>based on an averaging of grades weighted in favour of final year studies,
>with a small fudge factor employed when considering the award of Firsts
>(as there is no opportunity to get a grade above 1+, there is no
>equivalent to a student getting a 90% grade to up their average as would
>be possible in percentage systems).
>
>This system is not without its critics in the institution, particularly
>those wedded to percentages, and there are instances where the mechanical
>calculation of classifications using the system can leave colleagues a
>little uncomfortable. There are some areas that present more of an issue
>(exam grading is a particular bug-bear) and I would not describe our
>practice as fully developed. However, on the whole the system is well
>integrated into our courses and operates effectively.
>
>Andrew
>
>__________________________________________________
>Dr Andrew Revitt
>Educational Developer
>Academic Development
>University Campus Suffolk
>Waterfront Building
>Neptune Quay
>Ipswich
>Suffolk
>IP4 1QJ
>Tel. (01473) 338597
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Macdonald, Ranald F
>Sent: 07 December 2011 18:08
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>I agree completely about the nonsense of trying to use percentage marking.
>
>In my early days of HE teaching I was course leader for a BTEC Business
>and Finance course and subsequently became an external moderator in many
>FE and HE institutions. The grading scale was Distinction, Merit, Pass
>and Fail, though many people couldn't resist using pluses and minuses.
>We developed clear criteria against a set of descriptors and there was
>little argument about the validity and robustness of the process. As I
>moved more to degree teaching and course leadership I tried to use broad
>marking scales but, other than on the modular programme at the University
>of Derby, everyone was stuck on percentages, leading to endless debates
>at exam boards around the margins. It was seen as more convenient for
>calculating averages and degree classifications and was supposed to
>remove any subjectivity - mmmm.
>
>Ranald
>
>
>Ranald Macdonald SFSEDA, FHEA, NTF
>Emeritus Professor of Academic Development, Sheffield Hallam University
>Higher Education Consultant Senior Associate: Professional Development,
>C-SAP Subject Network
>+44 (0)1629 734307 or 07900 213800 (mobile)
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> and:
>www.ranald.pbworks.com<http://www.ranald.pbworks.com/>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Darren Gash
>[[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 07 December 2011 10:05
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Agreed. I've previously used Middlesex University's 20 point scale, which
>proved to be a good middle ground between the standard classifications
>(too broad) and a percentage scale (too narrow). So, for example, a 2.1
>would be divided up into marks of 8, 7, 6 and 5, where 5 is the highest
>grade. This was also good for students as it provided an incentive to
>improve their performance within a particular classification range
>
>On 7 December 2011 09:47, Elizabeth Cleaver
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>I too use a 15 point scale (although only in my capacity as an external
>examiner at Staffordshire Uni). I think the scale works well and it
>equates easily to the A-F range. However, as Shan points out you need to
>be clear (in your marking criteria) what differentiates a 14 from a 15
>(or an A from and A+) etc. All in all, I think for subjects where there
>is no right or wrong answer, small percentage differences are not
>particularly helpful and the 15 point scale seems to work well.
>
>Elizabeth
>
>Dr. Elizabeth Cleaver
>Head of Learning Development Unit
>Newman University College
>Birmingham,
>B32 3NT
>
>Tel +44 (0)121 476 1181 ext
>2396<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201181%20ext%202396>
>Mob +44 (0)7808 768888<tel:%2B44%20%280%297808%20768888>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Shan Wareing
>Sent: 06 December 2011 23:36
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Hi Janet and everyone
>
>Here at UAL, we've just moved to a 15 point scale using letter grades (A+
>to F-), for reasons including the ones already mentioned (to encourage
>use of the full range of grades, especially at the top end, and to
>discourage long discussions about the difference between 57% and 56%),
>and because most people say the letters are more intuitive to understand
>and travel better (eg when overseas students return home).
>
>We have 8 standard marking criteria, which always have to appear on
>feedback forms but can be marked as 'not applicable' and can be nuanced
>for the assignment and subject area. A matrix indicates achievements at
>each letter band for each criteria, which is built on Bloom, Perry etc,
>and is adapted for the creative visual arts in particular, including
>experimentation and manual skills development.
>
>We've recently had the implementation of the criteria evaluated (the
>evaluation does points out that by moving to institutionalised standard
>practice we were flying in the face of most of the assessment
>literature), which showed a largely positive reception by staff, and we
>saw clear improvements in our assessment ratings in the NSS and
>Postgraduate Experience Student Survey.
>
>An advantage of having a standard feedback form and standardised criteria
>is we can build an online grading and feedback tool which automatically
>populates fields from the student record systems (e.g. course unit code,
>student number), can upload the standard text from the matrix - which can
>be deleted or adapted, and allows the grade entered to be uploaded back
>into the Student Record System, which reduces human error in mark
>transcription, means all percentage & addition calculations, and capping
>for referrals, are done within the SRS, and saves time. The Assessment
>Tool can publish feedback as a PDF in our VLE - we're just in the final
>stages of trialling it in live summative assessments at present.
>
>Details, including the evaluation, are here:
>http://www.arts.ac.uk/assessment/, and the feedback forms & matrix are
>available as downloads here:
>http://www.arts.ac.uk/assessment/resources/downloads/download.html. You
>can't see the online Assessment Tool yet but there is some information
>about it
>
>all the best
>Shan
>
>Dr Shân Wareing
>Dean of Learning and Teaching Development University of the Arts London
>272 High Holborn, London WC1V 7EY
>T:020 7514 8051<tel:020%207514%208051> Mobex: 3826
>M: 07725 705026<tel:07725%20705026> E:
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>________________________________________
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf
>Of Strivens, Janet
>[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
>Sent: 06 December 2011 17:34
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Anyone else trying in vain to change the terms of this discussion?
>
>Why do we assume that, because a university requires its grades to be
>reported in percentages and uses 70% to indicate a first class piece of
>work, all disciplines can differentiate between three grades of first
>class to correspond to 70% plus, 80% plus and 90% plus? It seems to me
>that differentiation of quality of work in English literature can be done
>with reasonable inter-rater reliability into four grades plus fail.
>Anything more fine-grained becomes iffy but i could be convinced by the
>evidence for discrimination between upper and lower ends of each grade,
>represented by (say) a mark of 63% and 67% within an upper second class
>grade and ditto with other grades. But discriminating within a range of
>70%-100%? Surely that must be nonsense?
>
>Janet Strivens
>
>PS I am however very interested in what you find out, Jo!
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Cooper, Alison
>Sent: 06 December 2011 12:53
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Dear Colleagues
>
>This raises an interesting topic that I am tasked to have some thoughts
>about (my own fault for asking awkward questions)..., around the topic of
>using the 'full range of marks', especially at the top end...
>
>Does anyone have access to any good examples of differentiated criteria
>within the wide 70%/First class /A grade band that seeks to recognise
>that this band is much wider than all the others, and so describes
>different kinds of performance/achievement within that grade band? (any
>discipline, but especially those subjects that often do not use the full
>range). I know it can be a case of semantic inflation - very = 70, very
>very = 80, very very very = 90, but if anyone has anything more
>substantive, I would love to see it.
>
>Also, I would be very interested in examples of assessment tasks that
>invite/encourage the width of performance/achievement possible in the top
>grade.
>
>Hope that makes sense! Thank you for reading this.
>
>
>Ali
>
>Ali Cooper
>Teaching and Curriculum Development Adviser/ Director of Studies for
>Certificate in Academic Practice (CAP) Organisation and Educational
>Development (OED), HR Building, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YW
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> tel:
>(01524 5)10632<tel:%2801524%20%205%2910632>
>Educational Development website: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/celt/celtweb/
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
>Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>Behalf Of Jo Peat
>Sent: 06 December 2011 12:27
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Assessment criteria for English Lit
>
>Dear colleagues
>
>I'd be very grateful if anyone has access to assessment criteria for BA
>English Literature that they think are particularly sound and that they
>would be happy to share. My colleagues on the English Lit degree are
>looking to revise their criteria and are especially interested in more
>categorised criteria for grades above 70% and criteria for groupwork. I
>have some information to share with them, but they're very interested in
>seeing criteria from colleagues at other institutions, if at all possible.
>
>Your help would be very much appreciated.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Jo
>
>Jo Peat
>Senior Lecturer in Learning and Teaching in HE LTEU University of
>Roehampton [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>020 8392 3237<tel:020%208392%203237>
>
>Newman University College, Genners Lane, Bartley Green, Birmingham B32
>3NT ( Registered Office ) Tel +44 (0)121 476
>1181<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201181> Fax +44 (0)121 476
>1196<tel:%2B44%20%280%29121%20476%201196>
>Newman University College is a charitable company limited by guarantee,
>Registered in England and Wales with Company number : 5493384 Charity
>number : 1110346 VAT number : 559 1908 08
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 21:53:22 +0000
>From: Joelle Adams <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Fwd: Journal of Academic Writing
>
>Of possible interest to SEDA colleagues.
>
>Begin forwarded message:
>
>*From:* "Ide.O'Sullivan" <[log in to unmask]>
>*Date:* 8 December 2011 16:19:23 GMT
>*To:* <[log in to unmask]>
>*Subject:* *FW: Journal of Academic Writing*
>
>Dear EWCA colleagues,
>
>
>
>We are delighted to inform you that the inaugural edition of the *Journal
>of Academic Writing, *the Journal of the European Association for the
>Teaching of Academic Writing, is now available online at
>http://e-learning.coventry.ac.uk/ojs/index.php/joaw.
>
>
>
>The *Journal of Academic Writing* is an international, peer-reviewed
>journal that focuses on the teaching, tutoring, researching,
>administration
>and development of academic writing in higher education in Europe.
>Published by the EATAW <http://www.eataw.eu/>, the *Journal of Academic
>Writing* is relevant to teachers, scholars, and program managers across
>disciplines and across the world who are interested in conducting,
>debating and learning from research into best practices in the teaching of
>writing.
>
>
>
>The inaugural edition contains papers from the EATAW 2009 Conference. We
>are very grateful to the editor, Dr. Lisa Ganobcsik-Williams, and the
>editorial team for brining this much anticipated inaugural issue to
>fruition.
>
>
>
>We hope that you enjoy the *Journal*.
>
>
>
>Kind regards,
>
>Íde
>
>
>
>Dr Íde O'Sullivan
>
>Writing Consultant
>
>Regional Writing Centre
>
>Centre for Teaching and Learning
>
>University of Limerick
>
>Limerick
>
>Ireland
>
>Tel: 061-202607
>
>Office: C1-065
>
>E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>
>http://www.ul.ie/rwc
>
>
>
>*Co-chair, European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing
>(EATAW): *http://www.eataw.eu/
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of SEDA Digest - 7 Dec 2011 to 8 Dec 2011 (#2011-228)
>*********************************************************
>
|
