A generic assessment framework as a tool for teacher development in agricultural science

This project reports on the use of a generic assessment framework in Agricultural Science as a tool for teacher development, in response to an external imperative to implement criterion-referenced assessment (CRA) across the University of Tasmania. The framework uses a unique diagrammatic approach to describe four key criteria and sub-criteria of knowledge, analysis, practical skills and communication. The relative emphasis on assessment of student proficiency in each of the four years of the degree course are represented by polygons. The project incorporated: (i) ascertaining the number and type of assessment tasks and use of CRA; (ii) two on-line surveys on staff use of and attitude towards CRA over a six-month period; and, (iii) an evaluation of peer-to-peer professional learning in the use of a generic assessment rubric. CRA was used either consistently or some of the time by 70% of teaching staff who responded, when averaged across the two surveys. The process of implementing CRA and the development of the generic assessment framework resulted in a small increase in staff understanding of the structure of assessment rubrics. The majority of staff considered that CRA was of potential benefit to their teaching and to student learning, although there were a few exceptions; potential reasons for this are discussed. Qualitative feedback from the surveys and workshop identified further issues regarding assessment for discussion within the school. The process of developing the generic assessment framework, which meets the assessment requirements for agricultural science, could be adapted for use in other disciplines within the University of Tasmania, or at other universities.

[1]  Robin Burgess-Limerick,et al.  Implementing Criterion-referenced Assessment Within a Multi-disciplinary University Department , 2000 .

[2]  Kevin F. Collis,et al.  Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy , 1977 .

[3]  Ranald Macdonald,et al.  Changing Assessment in Higher Education: A Model in Support of Institution-Wide Improvement , 2009 .

[4]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Indeterminacy in the use of preset criteria for assessment and grading , 2009 .

[5]  S. Brookfield Becoming a critically reflective teacher , 1995 .

[6]  D. Nicol,et al.  Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice , 2006 .

[7]  Clair Hughes,et al.  Developing generic criteria and standards for assessment in law: processes and (by)products , 2007 .

[8]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 2010 .

[9]  Donovan A. McFarlane,et al.  Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels , 2006 .

[10]  K. Perreault,et al.  Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 2011 .

[11]  D. Royce Sadler,et al.  Interpretations of criteria‐based assessment and grading in higher education , 2005 .

[12]  Tina Botwright Acuna A generic assessment framework for unit consistency in agricultural science , 2009 .

[13]  Stuart R. Phinn,et al.  A generic framework for criterion-referenced assessment of undergraduate essays , 1999 .

[14]  Geraldine Lefoe,et al.  Enhancing higher education through leadership capacity development: Progressing the faculty scholars model , 2007 .

[15]  Carla C. Johnson Technical, political and cultural barriers to science education reform , 2007 .

[16]  G. Gibbs,et al.  Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students’ Learning , 2005 .

[17]  G. Boulton‐Lewis Teaching for quality learning at university , 2008 .

[18]  Jan H. van Driel,et al.  Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers' practical knowledge , 2001 .

[19]  J. Biggs,et al.  Teaching For Quality Learning At University , 1999 .

[20]  J. Mcchesney Whole-School Reform , 1998 .