Don Lebler:
“What changes could you make in the ways you assess to improve outcomes for your students? ”
Please react using the form below, or contribute any relevant material by creating a ‘posting’. How to do that on this website, is described in this short tutorial.
This is an example comment. Leave your comments to the above question by using the form below. Fill in your name, write your text and click ‘SUBMIT’.
We are working now at finding more ways to include collaboration between students within assessment, for example in chamber music or song. I want to explore the possibilities we have for pass/fail, not always giving a mark out of 100. And I want to explore the potenital of the model in acting, where students have extensive “notes” or verbal feedback after a major performance, but not told a mark. When a mark is needed for the purposes of the degree, a mark is awarded, but the student only finds out about this if they really want to know, it is not inevitably given to them on a sheet of paper. I want to explore these possibilities because they seem to me to encourage students more to focus on the intrinsic value of the work, rather than on ticking the boxes of assessment. Lastly I would like to see self-assessment become a central thread, which has continuity through our programmes. At the moment we have some areas of self-reflective accounts, but they appear in different places, are always assessed by staff, and I wonder what they amount to.
We’re running a pilot in peer assessment within a small elective module in the coming year at the Guildhall School. The module is advanced ensemble and can be chosen by third & fourth year undergraduates. One of the aims will be to bring students inside the assessment process itself, to help them understand what exactly is involved in providing feedback and assessing levels of engagement with ensemble work. The highest category in this pilot will be ‘professional’and by getting students to reflect on the assessment criteria we will hopefully help them to understand more fully what being ‘professional’in this context entails. Another aim is to reinforce the importance of professional behaviour in rehearsal - an element that can profoundly affect a student’s career opportunities, but which is usually invisible to staff. It is only recently that our validating body has opened the door to peer assessment, so we are keen to see how it works in practice and how it is received by students & staff.
Pamela Lidiard
I believe in qualitative and developing assessment. This means evaluation of the process of producing music, practicing an instrument, organizing a concert: assessment of the procedure rather than merely the outcome.
Peer assessment in group lessons, like students performing after each other, had been an effective way of personal feedback and for encouragement. The students will have the chance to reflect on their performance, the given and attained feedback. I wish to develop their ability to listen to themselves and others, and to respect their own achievements as musicians and also the musical efforts of their fellow students’.
The goal is to reduce performance anxiety and elaborate interaction with the performer and the audience.
I want to have students in the panel, because in that way they may empower and involve themselves for the professional community of musicians and music educators!
Tapani
All the things mentioned above sound very promising, and it is great to read about such positive views and intentions. These are just a few thoughts inspired by the earlier posts.
There is an argument for non-graded or pass/fail assessment because it is less likely to encourage students to compete with each other, more likely to encourage the development of a community of mutual support in which students encourage and assist each other. This is particularly true if institutional policy allows norm-referenced assessment in which a predetermined proportion of students will get various categories of grades. Norm referenced assessment means that students essentially have to compete with each other to be included in the highly ranked categories. If grades are based on predetermined levels of achievement relative to criteria and standards, the need to compete for good grades should be less likely to produce this competitive atmosphere. Some institutions may not permit pass/fail results or may severely limit the proportion of courses that can have this kind of assessment in a degree program.
I also strongly support the greatest possible use of self-assessment. There are systems where students submit a self-assessment report (sometime including proposed marks) and that forms the basis for a response from teachers addressing the points made by the student as well providing additional comments and feedback. The teachers then award a mark that may or may not reflect the view of the student, but at least the student has had the opportunity to make the first judgment of their own work. This method could be used in a variety of situations and presents relatively small challenge to existing practice, because the teacher is still awarding the mark or grade.
Anything that encourages students to be actively involved in assessment rather than simply having assessment ‘done to them’ has got to be a good thing.
Don.
Something which has struck me again this week about the importance of peer assessment is in enabling the skill and culture of constructive feedback between peers. I’ve been aware that this is something sorely lacking at times in the profession. The rather deafening silence that can characterise the interaction betweeen orchestral players, for example, I suspect may well contribute to the instances of intense anxiety and injuries which we all know about.
Helena
The Griffith University (of which the Queensland Conservatorium is a part) has decided to completely rejuvenate its policy on assessment and has embarked on a three year program to think freshly about assessment and roll out new policies and processes over the coming three years. This is an exciting prospect, and yesterday, there was the first of what will be a series of full day workshops bringing together people from across the University to share experiences and work together to develop our understandings of this important aspect of our teaching practices. It was fantastic to be part of this interaction, and it reminded me in some ways of the wonderful experiences we shared in Järvenpää. One of the things my colleagues at the Conservatorium are planning next is to gather in groups of four or five with an external expert on assessment and each of us will bring an example of an assessment process we would like to improve, including some examples of the work students have submitted and our assessments of the work. We hope to arrive at a consensus as to what constitutes various standards of student achievement and eventually extend this kind of process to other disciplines, initially our colleagues in the creative arts. We expect that sharing our work in this way will enable us to benefit from the fresh perspectives others in the group will bring and help each of us to improve our practice. I will keep you posted as to how this works out.
Don.
Thanks for posting this, I think I might just bookmark this.
Hello Everybody, and greetings from Australia.
I am so sorry that I was not able to join you in person this time, but I am enjoying the chance to observe at a distance via the web site. It is wonderful to see so many friends and colleagues gathering in such a fabulous setting to do this important work together. I really do wish I could have been there in person, but I will pop in from time to time on the site and pretend I am there with you all.
Bye,
Don.