16.1 Assessments

Part of the job is to ascertain the level of mastery a student has achieved relative to the learning outcomes. In theory, the learning outcomes are aligned to Bloom’s taxonomy covering one or more of the topics; knowledge, comprehending, applying, analysing, synthesizing, and evaluating. The first bloom level is fairly straightforward and many of the courses in the first and second year of university are foundational and focused on this one level. The remaining levels are cognitive skills and use the knowledge level; with varying degrees of success.

The learning outcomes should be clear as to the level of mastery in each case, because almost any task we ask a student to do will have some degree of knowledge, comprehension, applying their knowledge, thinking about what they are doing, combining ideas, and thinking about how good their answer is. Even the naïve level of skill and expertise has these elements as the individual guesses, flails, and provides an answer. While it is doubtful, that a student will actually achieve any real level of expertise during their undergraduate degree, they should progress from naïve, to novice, to junior in one or more areas of speciality, and at the different types of cognitive skills by the time they graduate.

There are separate notes on each of the Bloom levels; how to teach them and how to assess them both online and in the classroom. There is a general note on teaching cognitive skills, and a note on skill and expertise as the topic relates to cognitive skills.

Our observations...

• It is important to remember that the point of assessing is to understand the mastery of the student on the subject, and not their test taking skills.
• The assessment situation and format should mimic as closely as possible the situation in which you hope the student will be able to demonstrate the mastery of the subject after your course.
• You cannot have quality assessments and have a quality assessing process without quality learning outcomes defined and built into the course, from end to end.
• Whatever you are assessing should be tied to a learning outcome.
• There should be sufficient assessments during a term to allow for one or two bad days for a student.
• If an assessment is going to have a significant weight associated with it, it is logical to assume that the equivalent weight is given to the effort to design the assessment, and to mark the assessment. Assessments should not be about how easy it is for the instructor to mark.

• Cheating on assessments will always be a problem, and certain students will always find a way to do it. While it does take skill and effort to create assessments which are more customized, and harder to cheat on, it is possible for any of the topics we have experienced as a student or as an instructor. Not every question can be protected, but it is possible to pick up appropriate clues and signals if a student is indeed cheating. There is significant material in the literature on how to minimize cheating while not increasing stress and anxiety, and allowing students a fair chance to demonstrate their mastery.
• As noted in many sources that discuss assessments, all assessments should have a test run, and the time adjusted based on the instructor skill versus the student skill (e.g., it will often take a student three or more times longer than the instructor to do the same question).
• It goes without saying, that assessments should be fair, processed in a timely fashion, with sufficient feedback that the student understands where they went wrong in the process of answering, issues with the final answer, and marked consistently.
• The assessment should take into account any environmental or ecosystem issues. For example, online assessments often take longer than in a classroom setting.
• We do not think that final exams should take place at ridiculous times like 9pm on a Friday night.
• There should be sufficient assessments during the term to provide evidence of student learning during the term; some students will start off slow, but will get it in the end, and the assessment process should be able to pick up a student’s learning curve in the course.
• In general, an assessment should be constructed to allow an average student to achieve an average result.
• When thinking about assessments, the mental health of the students should also be considered. There can be unnecessary stress and anxiety created in the period before an assessment, right before an assessment, during the assessment, and afterwards. What we don’t know of any instructors creating stress and anxiety on purpose, it is easy to do so accidentally without understanding the student mindset at the time. Uncertainty and fear will create stress and anxiety. The prospect of not being able to finish or to demonstrate their mastery will create stress and anxiety.
• It is important to always think about how students are approaching an assessment, and how they are told and taught about assessments. They are recommended to look at the whole assessment first, make a plan of attack, do the questions in the order that makes sense for them, if they get stuck carry-on and come back, and review the assessment before submission time. They are taught to have a strategy and a process for doing an assessment. If the assessment does not support a solid assessment strategy, this will increase stress and anxiety, and not be fair to the student.
• Remember, it is your responsibility to give the student a fair chance at demonstrating their mastery.

Further reading

• https://tomorrowsprofessor.sites.stanford.edu/posting/961
• https://uwaterloo.ca/keep-learning/exam-and-assessment-resources