Assessment for Learning Project 2013-2016

Contents:

Section 1: Introduction 2

Section 2: Assessment Provision – The Plymouth position 2013 3

Section 3: Recommendations 13

References 14

Pauline Kneale Jane Collings January 2013

Update: March 2015

Progress and activities towards achieving the recommendations have been updated (p 13 -

15). Schools and programmes in the university are continuing to embed Assessment for

Learning in practice. There is a review commissioned by Learning Support & Wellbeing on

the impact of the reduction of the DSA (2015/16) on students with additional needs. This will

have implications for assessment.

Introduction: October 2013

This report updates Plymouth University on the Assessment for Learning Project after nine

months. The report includes the original material, further examples of assessment practice at

Plymouth and progress against the recommendations.

1

Assessment for Learning 2013-2016 Project

Section 1:

Introduction:- October 2013

The AfL project has been underway for 18 months. This report updates the previous document with additional examples of practice, and progress against the Recommendations (p12).

The PedRIO ED team continue to run sessions with School and programme teams to enable appreciation of equality of access and inclusive assessment. There have been over 30 sessions to date with School and Programme groups, with all faculties represented.

There have been some excellent examples of changed practice put in place this session. Some Schools are recognising or increasing their use of the University Regulation that the form of retake assessment does not have to be the same as the original assessment, but must meet the stated learning outcomes. This is very welcome to students who otherwise have the expense of travelling to Plymouth for resits in August.

Further briefings and workshops can be arranged through teachandlearn@plymouth.ac.ukOr see https://www1.plymouth.ac.uk/research/pedrio/newsandevents/Pages/Teaching-and-Learning-Events.aspx

Introduction:- January 2013

Research with University colleagues during 2012-3 identified opportunities to evolve our assessment and feedback processes. This is a crucial NSS indicator; strength in this area would reduce our reputational risk ahead of the next QAA Institutional Audit.

The attached report Assessment Provision –The Plymouth position 2013 is the result of research with a wide range of students, professional and academic staff. Each time we considered an issue, more concerns surfaced. The report gives a flavour of the issues raised, the difficulties that students encounter, and makes a suite of recommendations.

It is clear we need to be better at supporting students with diverse needs; improving the assessment experience of all students will enhance everybody's experience. The University has an enviable reputation in supporting students with particular needs through one-to-one enablers and other specialised provision. However, as our disabled student numbers have grown we have fallen behind in providing effective and research informed assessment and feedback practices. We should prioritise inclusive assessments, and minimise our MAP (modified assessment provision) needs, so that all our students are treated as equally as possible in all aspects of their programme

Disabled students working towards different assessments miss opportunities for group support and are treated as ‘other’. The same learning, support and inclusive assessment opportunities (MAP-free assignments) would provide a common, collegiate, level playing field for all our students, would streamline many processes and be transparently fair.

There is some excellent practice in Plymouth with some programmes having a range of diverse assessments spaced throughout the year and there are a small number of modules which have a choice of assessment methods where students select the assessment methods which best meet their individual needs. Where this is already happening in the

2

University, the student experience is exceptionally positive and MAP needs are rare. This practice should be extended to all programmes.

The research leading to this report identified benefits in changing the pattern of level 4, year 1 teaching to help students develop their understanding of academic standards and reduce the numbers referred and resitting modules. Moving away from terminal examinations would have the additional advantage of minimising staff workloads in providing written feedback on examination scripts in June. The Plymouth University Curriculum Enrichment Project (PUCEP) is a separate but related proposal.

We must revise and where appropriate consolidate all the documentation (there are currently over 30 separate documents) relating to assessment and feedback. These will be thoroughly overhauled and made available on a single consolidated website, which meets the QAA accessibility requirements. In addition, the new Teaching, Learning and Student Support Handbook and updated Teaching and Learning website when completed will become the University resource for all assessment and feedback matters.

Pauline Kneale

Assessment Provision – The Plymouth position 2013

Section 2: Report and Recommendations

“We face a system of assessment that has been subject to slow incremental change, to compromise and to inertia.............Assessment is not sufficiently equipping students to learn. We are failing to prepare them for the rest of their lives. ” Boud & Falchikov (2009)

“Exams assess surface learning. They do not assess teamwork, leadership, creativity or lateral thinking.......... it is no longer enough for graduates just to be knowledgeable.” (Race 1999)

1. Overview

Ambition – To provide all students with equal learning and assessment opportunities.

The numbers of disabled students studying at Plymouth University are increasing. The HESA disability descriptors 2012/13 record 2,262 students with a declared disability at Plymouth University and UPC, over 8% of all students.

In the academic year 2011/12 9.7% of Plymouth University students claimed the DSA compared to the national average of 5.9%. HE institutions with higher percentages of students in receipt of the DSA are Performing Arts or Agricultural Colleges.

In 2012/13 disabled students at Plymouth University by HESA categories included:

1302 specific learning difficulties 238 mental health condition 185 a long standing illness or health

condition

60 social/communication impairment 24 serious visual impairment 47 serious hearing impairment 60 physical impairment

3

In May 2013 examinations period, 1,020 disabled students at Plymouth University required modified assessment provision (MAP) involving over 10,829 hours of examinations. These MAP examinations required over 100 invigilators and exam rooms in 70 different locations. This entails considerable actual and hidden costs and additional time commitment for academics, administrative and exam invigilation staff. The examinations office estimate that 90% of their time is taken organising modified assessment provision.

Plymouth University has some excellent practice in supporting disabled students in recruitment and their learning. This probably influences the numbers of disabled students who chose to study in Plymouth. Plymouth University was a key partner in the 2003 – 2005 HEFCE funded SPACE project which aimed to improve the assessment provision for disabled students. The SPACE project resulted in the comprehensive publication ‘Inclusive Assessment in Higher Education: A Resource for Change’ (Waterfield & West 2006 ). This publication offers guidance on innovative assessment practice which is still applicable today.

“We need parity of assessment experience through strategic change, embedded, consistent practice rather than a ‘bolt on’ or ‘ad hoc’ provision” (Waterfield & West 2006 ).The SPACE project identified the need to support students with disabilities and to provide satisfactory student experience for all using an ‘inclusive approach’ model of assessment. In inclusive assessment a range of assessment opportunities are made available to all students who chose their assessment methods. Currently most programmes at Plymouth either use the ‘contingent approach’ where there is provision of special arrangements within existing systems or the ‘alternative approach’ which offers different assessment methods as a bolt-on for a minority of disabled students. Where staff have adopted the ‘inclusive approach’, MAPs are not needed.

The purpose of this review and the recommendations reported here is to:- Evidence our current position with respect to our legal and student experience

expectations Identify a programme of enhancement to our policies, procedures and training that

will lead to:o Enhanced experience of assessment for all studentso Reduction in the stress and anxiety experienced by disabled students in the

assessment processo Assessment practices that are more aligned with workplace practices o Clarity for staff on the design and delivery of fair and objective inclusive

assessments o Cost savings from the reduction of MAP, examination adjustments and case

conferences.

2. Establishing the 2012 assessment position at Plymouth

Evidence was gathered through: Scrutinising Plymouth University data, policies, reports, assessment guidance and

researching national and international assessment practices.

Informal individual and group interviews with 27 staff including Associate Deans, programme leaders, senior lecturers, business managers, faculty registrars, administrators, the Disability Assist team, examinations office staff, student representatives, student advice workers and students.

4

3. Findings

3.1) Interviews with academic and support staff showed:

1. A lack of clarity in the processes and procedures associated with assessment. Academic and support staff are uncertain where to locate current assessment regulations and guidance. Staff report difficulties locating information about students’ Student Support Documents (SSDs).

2. Staff were concerned about designing appropriate assessment alternatives and asked for guidance on assessment tariffs and equivalences.

3. There is inconsistent practice across the university relating to assessment. Within some programmes staff ensure the provision of inclusive assessment and as a result have few complex MAPs. In other programmes there appears to be culture of mistrust towards students who require modified assessment provision.

Staff identified specific areas of uncertainty regarding assessment including:-

Modified assessment provision Alternative assessment Inclusive assessment Innovative assessment Adjustments in assessment Assessment equivalents Choice of assessment methods The assessment requirements of

professional bodies & QAA subject benchmarks

Student Support Document Extenuating circumstances Chronic illness forms The use of case conferences Issues of ‘fitness to study’, ‘fitness to

graduate’ and ‘fitness to practice’ The role of the Claro enabler The use of assistive software Location of regulations

3.2) Existing assessment modifications lead to unreasonable student experiences:-

A student with a MAP of 100% extra exam time and with 25% rest breaks involves 7 ½ hours for each 3 hour exam. Combined with the additional invigilation costs the process is untenable for both the student and the university.

A student who is unable to take five 2 hour exams due to exam stress and phobia was given ‘home papers’ with a 2 week time limit and one time constrained exam in their ‘own room’. During the exam the student experienced a panic attack and needed to be escorted home by the invigilator.

Long thin modules with 70% summative assessment leads to exam overload in the May examination weeks for over 1000 students. We should consider alternatives that reduce the stress on our students and spreads the workload more evenly. Introducing short modules is one option.

Guidance notes on alternative assessment in one faculty advise a 2 hour unseen Stage 4 exam assessment might be replaced by four 2500-word essays. This is not a comparable assessment experience.

5

A student who did not receive their MAPs subsequently sued the university. The Court awarded the student a sizable financial settlement. We need to be fair to all students assessing their ‘learning’ in a manner that is compatible with their disability.

3.3) Current assessment practice offers staff challenges.

There are concerns over issues of ‘fitness to study’, ‘fitness to graduate’ and ‘fitness to practice’.

Academic staff report capacity issues. Where programmes have large cohorts of students, some staff report exams were one of the few viable assessment methods.

Where modified assessment provision is identified for a student, academic staff are required to set alternative or adjust assessments. Staff experience difficulties in identifying appropriate inclusive assessment methods and report it is a time consuming process.

Staff stated they are unclear of the alternative methods they can recommend and what constitutes an appropriate assessment. Staff requested more support, a predetermined framework or principles of inclusive assessment practice.

There are staff concerns over alternative assessment, plagiarism and academic dishonesty.

Staff report that when they provide alternative forms of assessment they often have the responsibility for additional arrangements including timetabling, rooms, invigilators, amanuensis, own rooms, ICT and other adjustments. All MAP arrangements for exams and in-class tests are now organised by the examinations office.

Staff report that they can arrange MAPs with sufficient notice but there are problems of late notification of a MAP by students.

Assessment equivalence is another concern with varied practice across programmes. One school has a guidance document ‘Principles to be considered when designing alternative assessments’. This type of guidance is not consistent across the university.

Some staff are concerned at the level of ‘over assessment’ of students and the volume of summative assessment especially in students’ first year of study.

Some staff want to see an increase in formative and continuous assessment which count towards the final module mark but with pass or fail as the only grades.

The development of self and peer assessment including student designed assessment criteria could offer students insight in assessment and ownership of the process and reduce staff workload.

Staff report that many students choose modules on the basis of preferred assessment methods rather than its content . The SPACE project (2006) researched the most popular assessment modes and reported the five preferred methods:-

1. Continuous assessment, 2. Coursework with discussion, 3. Research projects, 4. Essay assignments, 5. Multiple choice questions.

6

3.4) Modified Assessment Provision (MAP)

The Student Support Document (SSD) contains all the information about a student’s needs, support and assessment adjustments required throughout their programme of study. Modified Assessment Provisions (MAPs) are used for any assessment that contributes to the final mark of a module. The purpose of these arrangements is to facilitate equality of access for students who may be disadvantaged when assessed. Over recent years there are increasing student numbers requiring MAPs.

During May 2013 there were 1,020 students requiring MAPs in exams. Of these, 121 students had complex MAPs requiring taking examinations in their own room with an invigilator and an additional 88 students required their own room and a reader or a scribe.

In degree programmes where inclusive assessment is embedded into the course design MAPs and Case Conferences are rarely used. This is excellent practice the University can build on.

3.5) Examinations

In the Faculty of Arts and Humanities there are very few exams complex MAPs are seldom required. In other faculties there are programmes with up to 70% time controlled summative examinations with many complex MAP issues.

In-class tests and Computer Aided Assessment (CAA) are increasingly used as a method of assessment. These methods can be time efficient and often require only simple MAPs such as extra time and ICT support.

One academic reported the logistics of organising computer based tests was problematic due to resourcing issues; locating 300 computers at one time was not possible. However other universities with a module cohort of a 1,000 use computer based assessments. Software such as QuestionMark Perception enables students to take their assessments at different times over 2 days from any location, overcoming limited ICT resources and offers students instant feedback on their achievements.

Some academics delivering modules with large student cohorts insist that exams are a necessity. Students are required to demonstrate answering questions under time constraints. There appears to be a lack of understanding of the use of inclusive assessment methods with large student cohorts.

A number of academics cited academic dishonesty as the main reason to hold exams. Electronic submission though enables checking for plagiarism. Turnitin is accepted internationally as appropriate software to detect plagiarism and provide positive assistance in inclusive assessment practice. Good assessment design can minimise plagiarism.

During the examinations period the exams office requires up to 70 rooms in a variety of locations for MAP assessments. These small group or individual room exams require over 100 invigilators. It is difficult to control the environment around many rooms on campus. In 2012 there were 20 formal complaints from these students about rooms, location, interruptions, noise and invigilators. One exam had to be terminated due to double booking. The examination office reports that the main MAP exam hall is a distracting, noisy environment; with students leaving at different times, asking questions, requiring comfort breaks etc.

7

“Unfortunately I feel the special examination arrangements put in place on this occasion assisted only in exacerbating my disability further.” Student with MAP

The continuing emphasis on traditional handwritten examinations is not aligned to the 21st century workplace where reports, research etc. are completed on electronic devices, group research, presentation and report writing are common practice. (Mogey et al 2008)

3.6) Case Conference

Some faculties are arranging over 65 Case Conferences each academic year. The process is time consuming and has considerable cost implications for the University.

Case Conferences are held to ensure action is taken to foster student achievement. Triggers for case conference include a student experiencing multiple difficulties, submitting claims for extenuating circumstances for the same reason on two occasions, or a student has problems across a number of modules. Students will be recommended to see Disability Assist, Counselling Service or a Student Union Advice Centre worker prior to the Case Conference being held.

The Case Conference is convened by the faculty registrar with membership that includes the student, programme manager, appropriate professional staff and support service staff. The Case Conference discusses the student difficulties and recommends future action. These actions are discussed with the external examiner and forwarded to the Award Assessment Board for approval.

Staff voiced concerns as Case Conferences are used as the only vehicle to halt a student’s programme of study. This is due to lack of information on simpler less time consuming processes.

In a Master’s degree programme with inclusive assessment there are no Case Conferences.

A number of staff suggested it is timely to review of the purpose and the terms of reference for Case Conferences.

4. National influences and Guidance on inclusive assessment

4.1) Key Information Sets (KIS)

These comparable sets of information on undergraduate courses are designed to meet the information needs of prospective students. Since September 2012 the KIS contains detailed information on methods of assessment in every programme. Students can compare assessment methods across different universities. Academics report many students chose modules on the basis of assessment methods rather than module content. The KIS data provides prospective students with the opportunities to choose university degree programmes on the basis of preferred assessment methods (inclusive assessments).

4.2) QAA subject benchmarks

Interrogating the QAA subject benchmark statements and professional body accreditation requirements shows there is much more flexibility in assessment processes than is understood by some academic staff. The QAA guidance on assessment states: “Institutions

8

should ensure that their assessment strategies and methods are sufficiently flexible to give all students an opportunity to meet the objectives of their programmes of study. Institutions should use a range of methods as a matter of good practice”.

A number of QAA subject benchmark statements were examined. They are consistently flexible in the choice of assessment methodologies. The guidance on assessment includes:-

The assessment methods should relate to the learning objectives. Assessment methods may include formal examinations (which can be seen, unseen or open-book), multiple-choice tests, assessed essays, practical reports, other reports, information technology use, case-studies, portfolios, dissertations and formal assessment of performance in oral presentations and debates, including seminar and individual presentation…Assessment procedures should not disadvantage disabled students. (Psychology)

Assessment methods will be balanced in accordance with the learning outcomes and will include some or all of the following modes…..(as above) (Bioscience)

The learners are likely to meet a range of methods of assessment, depending on the aims and learning outcomes of the programme or module and on the knowledge and skill being assessed. Assessment will be carried out according to context and purpose and, where different methods of assessment are in use, will recognise that learners may exhibit different aptitudes in different forms of assessment. (Maths and Statistics)

Assessment is the means by which students are measured against benchmark criteria and should form a constructive part of the learning process. (Engineering )

The use of diverse assessment strategies should meet the varied needs of students and should provide the opportunity to incorporate innovative and original approaches. The assessment strategies adopted should include some or all of the following:

• a range of oral and written presentations, such as seminar presentations and essays

• examinations, whether seen, unseen or open book• case-studies• peer assessment• reflective journals, critiques or portfolios• practical-based, project-based or work experience reports• computer-based assessments• dissertations and independent study

( Health Studies )

4.3) Professional Bodies

A number of degree programmes need to meet the requirements of professional bodies to gain accredited status. Research into professional body requirements indicates flexibility of assessment methodology. The key factor is the achievement of the learning outcomes demonstrated in a way that lets the student show what they can do. Professional Bodies are aware of their responsibilities specified in the Disability Discrimination Act and they offer students opportunities to apply for reasonable adjustments.

9

Finance and Accounting professional bodies, including ICAEW, CIMA, ACCA, offer exemptions, extra time, and scribes for time-controlled, paper-based exams. ACCA use Computer-based exams (CBEs) for the first seven of their Foundation-level exams which can be taken at any time during the year and retaken as many times as the student needs. Results are available immediately at the end of the exam.

Professional body requirements are changing rapidly; for example the Solicitors Regulation Authority in November 2012 announced that time controlled examinations were no longer a requirement for a Qualifying Law Degree.

Examples of professional body statements include:- “Assessment practices should be fair, valid, reliable, and appropriate to the level of

the award being offered. Education providers should have in place policies and procedures to deal thoroughly, fairly and expeditiously with problems which arise in the programme of assessment of students.”

(British Psychological Society- accreditation through partnership)

“Assessment methods must be employed that measure learning outcomes. There must be effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms in place to ensure appropriate standards in assessment.”

(Health Care Professional Council –duties of an education provider)

"Assessment practices should be fair, valid, reliable and appropriate to the level of award being offered - providers should have in place procedures to deal thoroughly, fairly and expeditiously with problems which arise in the programme of assessment of students. Assessment should reflect the subject benchmark statement and Learning Outcomes."

(JBM- Joint Board of Moderators for Engineering )

5. Examples of assessment practice at Plymouth

Faculty of Arts & Humanities

The Theatre and Performance degree offers a model of good practice in inclusive and innovative assessment. A number of students with profound additional needs have been able to successfully complete their degree without the use of alternative or modified assessments. During the 3rd year of the Theatre and Performance degree assessment is aligned to work place practice. A 3rd year module Theatre Society and Culture offers 3 different modes of assessment. Students choose from 3 assessment options a performance, a presentation in a seminar or an essay. The students’ choice of assessment options is evenly spread and the feedback is positive.

In the B.A Graphic Communication and Typography the programme is structured using short fat modules. Team assessment takes place over 2 days which includes second marking and moderation. Term time resits operate at Level 1 and 2. Student satisfaction in the NSS for assessment and feedback are very high. In the School of Education the 3 year B.Ed. Education programme piloted the use of assessment choice during 2012/13. Students are able to choose from 3 assessment methods in each module. In 2013/14 presentations will be confined to smaller modules; the logistics of offering a choice including a presentation to a group of 200 were overwhelming.   Assessment is brought forward where possible. This is to provide early summative feedback in each module, through short assessments such as an annotated bibliography or an analysis of an article. The digital literacy pathway has developed a process where co-

10

constructing the material to be assessed is part of the module and includes to co-development of action research.

In the International Masters Programme (Education) students can chose their mode of assessment in every module. Deep Criteria and Assessment Modes apply to all modules in the programme, across the subject areas. In addition to addressing the Deep Criteria each assignment must also address one of the Assessment Modes. All assessment modes must be covered by the end of the programme

History has 90 % course work with 2 compulsory formal time constrained exams and in -class tests in the first year. Students with a MAP are offered assessments as specified in Student Support Documents. The 2nd year History core modules are assessed through course work with viva voce and an archived based study. History students can chose modules which suit their preferred assessment methods and therefore avoid all time constrained exams in their 2nd and 3rd years. English has no exams. Presentations, course work and viva are the most common methods of assessment.

Faculty of Science and Technology

The Science Centres Communication module has a multi-faceted creative assessment which is visual, interactive and includes a design brief, a presentation, a business plan and a report.

A Biological Science module assessment includes a brief to write an article for a science magazine, design a leaflet about a plant species for visitors to the Eden Project to include physiology and cultivation .

The School of Marine Science and Engineering in piloted a module for one year in 2004/5 with student choice of assessment methods. Students choose from weekly tests, an end of module test (open book), coursework or a portfolio. Overall marks for non-disabled students varied up or down by +/- 3%. One student with disabilities achieved an 11% increase in marks compared to their previous timed exam performance. The assessment pilot resulted in no requests for modified assessment provision for the module. There was very positive feedback from students for this approach which included:- “This has been good it has given us the responsibility ... It is providing a fair and balanced ground for all students.” The module was however discontinued.

Faculty of Health and Human Sciences

In the School of Nursing and Midwifery the PGDip Surgical Care Practitioner programme with a 60 credit per year module with staged assessments in year 1 conducts instant resits built in following the provisional results. This is to ensure that students have completed all requirements for the first year of the programme and they are able to progress into year 2.

The School of Nursing and Midwifery is planning to introduce this process into all undergraduate programmes as it will facilitate a greater number of students who have completed all requirements in each year by July, reduce the number of resits in August , reduce the number of repeating students and meet the professional requirements of the Nursing and Midwifery Council.

Plymouth Business School

11

Good practice in the School of Tourism and Hospitality is their oversight and planning of assessment at programme level. All optional modules are taken within the school they have control over the balance of assessment methods and scheduling, which avoids overload for staff and students, and ensures that feedback is speedy. Before submitting course work students complete a reflection on the cover sheet this includes, what mark they think their work deserves, the strengths and weaknesses best of their assignment , rate their attendance and state the number of hours spent on the assignment. This enables staff to target detailed 1:1 verbal feedback in addition to the written feedback. Students receive feedback and model answers after every short answer and MCQ exams

The School of Law have a comprehensive staff assessment handbook which details assessment information.

6.) Other matters

The review process has identified that there are a large number of documents, guidance and policies relating to assessment in the University website. Over 34 documents for example. Assessment guidance needs to be updated as a single site online resource; with an agreed protocol for updating.

QAA Institutional Review processes require that our assessment guidance and policies are transparent and available to all. The updated ‘Assessment Guidance Handbook’ will be on line and visible externally.

Good practice examples of ‘Feedback and Assessment’ policies are available for the universities of Manchester; Swansea, UWE . These should be considered as part of the updating procedure.

7.) References

Boud, D.& Falchikov,N ( 2007) Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education – Learning for the longer term. London. Routledge.

British Psychological Society Accreditation through Partnership (2012) http://www.bps.org.uk/system/files/images/scot_educational_accreditation_2012_web.pdf

Mogey,N., Sarab,G. Haywood,J., Van Heyningen, S.,Dewhurst,D., Hounsell,D., Neilson,R. (2008)The end of handwriting? Using computers in traditional essay examinationsJournal of Computer Assisted Learning 24 (1), 39-46

Race, P.(1999) 2000 Tips for Lecturers. London Routledge.Waterfield,J. & West,B.(2006) Inclusive Assessment in Higher Education: A Resource for

Change. University of Plymouth. Plymouth. https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/uploads/production/document/path/2/2517/Space_toolkit.pdf

Pauline Kneale Jane CollingsJanuary 2013

Revised and updated October 2013 Recommendations updated March 2015.

12

13

Section 3: Recommendations: updated March 2015.

8) Recommendations to enhance Plymouth University assessment processes and procedures

Column 2 captures the recommendations made in 2012, and agreed by the University. Column 3 captures activity in 2013Column 4 captures activity to 2015.

This project is essentially complete but there is continuing work to update web site and resources as new issues emerge. There is a need to further embed these processes and procedures in University practice. .

University actions Activity toOctober 2013

UpdateMarch 2015

1 Update all the PU assessment and related strategy, policy, protocol and guidance documents, to create a single online resource which is completely aligned to the disability agenda, and includes a ‘Feedback and Assessment’ section.

New webpages launched Teaching & L earning & Quality Office

Draft Assessment Policy in consultation

The refreshed and extended T&L website was launched in 2014 with comprehensive assessment pages

New PU Academic regulations website created with all the assessment related policiesComplete

2 Update and circulate the SPACE publication. ‘Inclusive assessment – a resource for change’ (Waterfield and West 2006) to School Learning and Teaching Committees.

CompletedNow on T&L website

New inclusive assessment portal launched 2015

3 Liaise closely with ADTLs, Faculty Registrars, Learning Development and Well-Being teams and the Examinations team to ensure all procedures (strategy, policy and guidance) are ‘workable and student friendly’ in a revised Assessment Policy for staff and students.

Draft Assessment Policy in consultation

PU Assessment Policy launched (2014) together with a number of assessment related policies including: Anonymous Marking , Moderation & Marking, Extenuating Circumstances & Fitness to Study. Complete

4 Develop a set of resources and workshop for programme and module teams to review their current practice. This ‘Plymouth’ process will use the HEA toolkit, ‘A Marked

Completed

Workshops and events

A range of assessment resources on the T & L website (continually updated) to enable programmes to review their

14

Improvement’ , Create an assessment equivalent framework with guiding principles. (examples: HEA project What’s it Worth and the UEL Tariff ). Include guidance on the choice of assessment methods, inclusive assessment and universal design (examples University of Dublin )

available for academic staff.

T& L website contains a bank of assessment resources

assessment, marking & feedback practice.Updated pages on plagiarism.New staff guidance on Inclusive Assessment published and online.CompleteA DLE module for students on good academic practice planned with a planned launch in 2015.

5 Consideration should be given to redesigning programmes with reference to the length of a 20 credit module with each module having a maximum of 2 summative inclusive assessments.

On-going This is an integral part of CEP .Piloted in 2014/15 and due to be launched across the university 2015/16Complete

6 20 credit modules to have a maximum of 5 learning outcomes; 2-3 relating to skills development and 2-3 to knowledge acquisition

Recommendation atT& L committee 14/10/13 item 9.

This is an integral part of CEP .Piloted in 2014/15 and due to be launched across the university 2015/16Complete

7 Identify areas where PU learning, teaching and assessment guidance is not available and add to the resource.

Guidance on military service, and religious observance required

Revised T&L website launched with T & L handbookNew regulations completed

Guidance and resources are continually being updated during 2014-15 there is an additional focus on personal tutoring, consistent marking and feedbackComplete

8 Work with TIS to advise on updating processes so that academic and professional staff can identify and easily access information on students with a SSD.

On-goingNew DLE for 2014 will assist in dissemination of information

Staff are now able to identify students with a SSD through Unit-EComplete

9 Deliver support for programme and module assessment development in conjunction with Education Development, Learning Development, PALS and the TEL team.

On –going16+ workshop sessions on assessment delivered for academic staff

Continuing provision of away days & events focusing on design and delivery of assessment & feedback in faculties, schools and programmes. In addition one to one support has been provided.ED with the TEL team offer combined sessions on the use of the DLE in assessment and feedback.

15

The joint HEA & PU Inclusive Assessment conference November 2014 attracted 150 participants.Complete

10 The examinations office to review examinations practice: Access the Open University DVD on training

invigilators Consider using home invigilators to reduce ‘own

rooms’ requirements Use CLARO enablers as invigilators Consider having a dedicated budget for exam

adjustments Use a tiered system of exam adjustments

i) Standard ii) Complex iii) Cannot accommodate

Review the use of assistive technology in exams

OngoingThe examinations office is conducting a review of the implications of CEP on the examinations office workload.

A review is being conducted on the impact of the reduction of the DSA on PU students and their support in assessment and exams.

Ongoing

School actions Activity11 As part of programme and module review and action

planning consider using the Plymouth University assessment audit, HEA toolkit, ‘A Marked Improvement’ SPACE publication: ‘Inclusive assessment – a resource for change’ (Waterfield and West 2006) and consider its implications for programme and module assessment

Review sessions conducted at 9 school T & L away days

The publication of a staff guide to inclusive assessment (2014).An inclusive assessment portal with podcasts and resources will be launched in 2015.The assessment webpages provide a range of resources to support inclusive assessment.From 2015/16 the immersive 1st year module and the Plymouth Plus modules can only be assessed through inclusive methods

12 Identify modules and programmes which would benefit from additional resource to help with revising curriculum and assessment activities to meet the ‘inclusive assessment’ agenda

Schools are actively using support from ED / PedRIO.

Both targeted support and facilitation at schools away days is continuing.Ongoing

16

Programme and module actions Activity13 Review the scheduling of assessments, examinations

and in class tests. With an aim to achieve even distribution throughout the year rather than in 3-4 weeks in April and May. This will lead to assessments appropriately paced throughout the programme with opportunities for assessment feedback that will impact on student performance.

On-going Under CEP modules will be assessed throughout the academic year with two exams periods in January and May.

Ongoing

14 Ensure curriculum design and development, through programme review, aligns with inclusive assessment approaches

On-going

17

18