Hot on the heals of my post about Sue Bloxham’s keynote at the Assessment in Higher Education workshop in June, this post is about the follow-up Transforming Assessment webinar “Keys to transforming assessment at institutional level: selected debates from AHE2016.
Three talks from the AHE workshop had been selected for the webinar on the basis of the fact that they really did focus on change at the institutional level, and I thoroughly enjoyed chairing the session. If you want to watch the whole thing, click here for more information and the recordings.
The first of the three talks that we’d selected was “Changing feedback practice at an institutional level” in which Sally Brown talked about work at the University of Northumbria, Leeds Met (now Beckett) University and Anglia Ruskin University. Kay Sambell had given this talk at the earlier workshop and their conclusions were that
- Slow transformative development has more impact than attempts at quick fixes;
- Having money to support activities and personnel is important, but large amounts of cash doesn’t necessarily lead to major long-term impact;
- Long-term ownership by senior managers is essential for sustainability;
- To have credibility, activities need to be based on evidence-based scholarship;
- Committed, passionate and convincing change agents achieve more than top-down directives.
The third of the three talks was “Changing colours: what happens when you make enhancement an imperative?” in which Juliet Williams talked about the impact of the TESTA (Transforming the Experience of Students through Assessment) Project at the University of Winchester.
However, from the conversations that I had at the workshop in June, it was the middle talk (given at the Webinar by Dave Morrison of the University of Plymouth because Amanda Sykes from the University of Glasgow was unavailable) that had inspired many of the attendees – bearing in mind that these were largely assessment practitioners not experts. The title was “Half as much but twice as good” and the important points I picked up were that
- Timely feedback is more important than detailed feedback
- [students are as busy as we are so] Less feedback can be more effective. If a student only reads your feedback for 30 seconds, what do you want them to take?
We ended with a good discussion of how to bring true institutional change.