students working in the just timber office
Teaching Stories

The Office: Episode Five

Authentic Learning

So, this week I want to talk about Authentic Learning. Hopefully you had a chance to look at the paper I mentioned by Marilyn M. Lombardi on ‘Authentic Learning for the 21st Century: An Overview’ (Educase 2007) which provides a really nice, simple and clear framework for what authentic learning is. It breaks it down into ten key components:

1. Real-world relevance
2. Ill-defined problem
3. Sustained investigation
4. Multiple sources and perspectives
5. Collaboration
6. Reflection
7. Interdisciplinary perspective
8. Integrated assessment
9. Polished product
10. Multiple interpretations and outcomes

For ‘Timber Engineering 4’- as I have noted previously- (see Episode 3) we used flipped teaching and a series of real-world projects to enable the students to learn. I also noted (in Episode 2) that we have provided a library of information which provides different information (sometimes conflicting) that students need to make sense of. In this episode I want to quickly and simply break down how I have attempted to provide all ten of these principles across the unit and specifically the four projects that the students are working on. I don’t intend to spend too long on each one – but instead provide a few practical examples that people might be able to replicate.

1. Real World Relevance

In one sense, all engineering should have real world relevance. But on this unit, I have tried to make this explicit. There are four projects and all four projects are designing buildings. One is a real building that was built, one is a real building that requires repair and two are made up, but could be real. To enhance this sense of real buildings every project includes a project information sheet and a job number. This is a simple summary of all the information provided and all the information required. This is supported with drawings, photos and further information.

2. Ill-defined problem/ 3. Sustained investigation/10. Multiple interpretations and outcomes

There are four projects that the students are working on. Two are what we call detailed design. The building size, shape and structure is already known – but the final sizes of elements needs to be confirmed. These two projects are designed to teach students the basic principles of timber design. The other two projects are less well defined. One is an existing building that needs strengthening. There are many options for strengthening a floor and students need to develop some different strategies and confirm which one the client should proceed with. The other is a portable theatre. This project is the one that students will be assessed on. It has a real client (Dave from the Old Vic presented to the students on Thursday and we are off to look round their building this Thursday) who has provided an open-ended brief for the students to propose their own solution to.

All four projects are non-trivial and require students to work on them for a number of days and weeks. The final assessed project (the portable theatre) was launched back in week 2 and students have until week 10 to provide a solution.

Finally I am looking forward to seeing the output of the final project and expect a diverse selection of solutions. Of course, I won’t know if I have been successful until I receive the students final reports.

4. Multiple sources and perspectives

As noted earlier students are provided with a library of information – not one definitive set of notes, however this is not enough to really achieve this aspect of authentic learning, as students should find the information themselves! Whilst they are presented with a large library of information they are not provided with everything. When designing a building there are a large swathe of codes and standards they should be looking at. There is also an even larger body of inspiration that they can use to inform their own design. So, as with other items, the first three projects the students predominantly have everything they need to complete the task but for the fourth project they will need to go beyond this information.

5. Collaboration/ 7. Interdisciplinary perspective

I have been running Timber 4 for a few years now and one of the most gratifying moments was when my tutees explained to me that unlike other projects they had worked on they had been forced to work together and collaborate right through their Timber Design project. I was delighted, as this is such a key skill for real life, however I am aware of other projects which are approached as ‘cut and shut’ where students all work independently and then stick their work together into one report. The design of the projects on this unit is such that working independently is just not possible. Every decision impacts on everything else. And hence the best way to work on the project is to sit together in a room and work collaboratively – in an office like environment.

Timber Engineering was the first time I felt as though I was doing ‘engineering’. This is a module that cultivated everything I’d learnt in my previous 3 years; communication, team-work, problem-solving, creativity and innovation. For a person who has never had the opportunity to work at an engineering company as an intern, this was the first real insight and experience I had as a structural engineer.” 

Making the project interdisciplinary is more difficult. The unit is after all just 10 credits, and the students are all designing in timber. They are required to think about architecture, acoustics, lighting, space. But ultimately, they are all acting as timber engineers. I would argue that on this point we are unable to fulfil the requirements of authentic learning. But fortunately, Civil Engineering students are also working on a much larger, more complex design project at the same time, where they must apply a much wider set of multidisciplinary skills. 

8. Integrated Assessment

The design of a theatre – the final project which students are marked on – is integrated right through the unit, being launched in week 2 and running until the end of week 10. The other projects are designed to both teach students and give them the skills to complete this project. There are a number of feedback (feedforward) mechanisms built into the unit – more of which will be discussed next week.

9. Polished Product

One of my aims when writing this unit was that students would produce a portfolio piece. Something that they can take to interview and be proud of. As a result the output is a report with drawings and calculations. The report is linked to the RIBA stages (which are used in industry). And students in previous years have found that the output has been very helpful in interview.

“In regards to recruitment, I would not have gotten my graduate job if it wasn’t for Timber Engineering. When I went in for my interview, the interviewers were amazed by the standards and level of detail that was undertaken in the design of the building. It was physical evidence that showed the recruiters that I had the skills, enthusiasm and ability to undertake responsibilities at their firm.” 

6. Reflection

Which leaves reflection. How do we integrate reflection into this process. I have to be honest, I find reflection hard, or to be more precise I find the articulation of reflection hard. I think, if there was one area that I would like to improve it is reflection. I will talk next week about feedback – and I hope that this will in part lead to reflection. But I know that there is more to it than just reflecting on feedback. One of the challenges is creating space for reflection, and as I sit here writing this I am thinking ‘how can I add some reflective practice into tomorrow?” After all last week, the students completed a project, and this week they start a new one, this feels like the ideal time to pause and reflect on their achievements to date, what they have learnt, and how they want to proceed. I’ll let you know how it goes.

Note: Quotes taken from an email a student sent me – used with permission

students working the office space
News, Teaching Stories

The Office: Episode Four

‘Space… ‘

At some point in Spring 2018 I went for an interview to be a BILT Fellow in Assessment and Feedback. All went well and I was offered a two-year Fellowship. But on reflection, I wasn’t sure if I really should be doing Assessment and Feedback – not because I don’t think it’s important, I do – but because I realised that having worked on a number of university projects as a practising engineer I was probably more suited to the other BILT theme, ‘Rethinking Spaces’. And so, I switched.

Last year, I spent my BILT time digging through literature on space (alongside all sorts of other things) and dreamt up some fun projects about it. And from this, ‘The Office’ was born. But it turns out that when you change space you change a whole load of other things as well. In simple terms, when I moved from thinking about teaching as lectures and considered it as coming to work, this raised so many more questions: questions about teaching delivery; identity; community; authenticity- not just space.

As a result, whilst my main topic is ‘space’, it has taken until Episode 4 to really talk about the physical space because, in short, I had so many other things to talk about. But this week I want to focus on the actual physical space.

Over the course of the last 6 months there were a number of questions to be answered. Boring, practical questions.

  • Where could I base my office?
  • How was it going to fit into the timetable?
  • How would the space look like anything other than a class room with tables grouped together?

To answer the first two questions, I reached out to a variety of different staff across the university, I visited different buildings, reviewed different options, but in the end the solution to both came from Engineering Timetabling – without whom this project could never have happened. We discussed pragmatic solutions, like allowing students to be present for core hours – but being able to go and do other things (like lectures, supervisor meetings or design project meetings) outside of these. Above all else we started the conversation early in the year, enabling options to be reviewed and timetabled early in the cycle – long before official deadlines.

To answer the third question, we started by looking at actual office spaces across the university campus, but nothing quite worked. And so, we went back to the old flatbed teaching room, as beloved by engineering (a quick walk around Queens building will show you just how much we love our flatbed teaching rooms).

The room was agreed before the summer break, enabling me to plan the space, have a trial run and work out the different furniture I needed to beg, steal or borrow. I made plans. The original plan is outlined below under week 1. There were a number of key features:

Entrance – To make the space feel more like an office and less like a classroom the first step was to create a different entrance. This was achieved very simply by putting a company sign by the office door, and placing plants either side of the entrance.

Entrance to the ‘Just Timber’ Office.

Working Space – The working space is laid out as desks in groups. Much like my old companies – tables are in lines – but unlike my old companies where everyone has a computer and at least a table each, here to fit in the number of students we placed groups of 4 students around two tables and there are no computers.

Students working in the office.

Huddle Space – When working in industry we used to have a Monday morning huddle – where we would plan the week ahead – this space would also be the location for lunch time talks. I created a large space where students could bring their chairs for the huddle.

Breakout Space – In addition to more formal working spaces, I wanted to create a breakout space which students could use to have a pause, discuss ideas, drink a cup of tea, read architecture magazines and generally refresh before cracking on with the next task at hand. It has 4 low chairs – taken from my own office (which now looks very sad) and a low coffee table. There is a couple of magazine racks with the latest issue of engineering and architecture magazines.

Students taking a break

Directors’ Tables – When in industry I have always worked in companies where the directors are in the same open plan office space as everyone else, no fancy corner offices with large leather sofas. The theory is that this flattens the hierarchy (which is does) but I also imagine the financial saving from space and furniture is quite attractive. To start with the Directors tables (where a PhD student and myself sit) were located by the huddle space for the simple reason that the tables could be quickly moved making more room to huddle in.

Directors’ Table

Storage – Finally to keep the illusion alive that this was an office and not a classroom a screen is set up (which students are invited to cover with inspirational images) and behind this all the excess chairs and tables are stored along with the lectern (nothing says lecture more than a lectern) and the giant projector screen. As the screen cannot be used a large TV is now wheeled in for all presentations.

Floorplan of the ‘Just Timber’ office.

Changes and reflection following the first week

Following the first week of delivery there was some immediate feedback from the students, most notably that there was not enough desk space. In addition, my plan to huddle did not materialize. Maybe because students were on heavy static seats rather than seats with wheels which can quickly be moved to other locations. As a result, the layout in week 2 was revised. More tables were put out, so groups now had 3 tables each rather than 2. The huddle space was removed.

There were some further consequences to this change in the use of the space in that there was now less furniture to store (all the tables in the room were being utilized) and as a result the breakout space became much bigger. In the first week I didn’t notice any groups sit in the comfy chairs, but in week 2 the space was used by a number of different groups during the day. This of course may be due to the students becoming more familiar with the space and the fact that one of their projects is much more open ended and so inspiration from different sources is required. But I also believe the space is now more welcoming.

We also opted to move the directors table to a more central position, so we were more in the mix. This didn’t change the number of enquiries during the day, but I was able to get a better feel for what was happening in the room and the conversations that were taking place – being in the ‘thick of it’.

Following the end of week 2 students confirmed that they were much happier with the space. One student requested that we use the large screen as the TV was harder to see, but I am reluctant to do this as there is still space for students to move closer if they wish and we would be back to just a flat bed teaching room if we have a lectern and large screen.

I also wonder if, by moving groups apart (there is a clear gap between each group now), whether there is a reduced sharing of information across groups and the groups become more insular, something I am very keen to avoid as the aim is that all students learn as much as possible. I will monitor in the weeks ahead. My feeling was, certainly in the first week, that when I shared some key information with one group – this was being quickly fed to other groups. For example one of the questions was whether all floor joists should be the same depth? Once explaining the different arguments to one group I found as I talked to other groups they presented back to me the same reasoning I had given, acknowledging that this seemed to be the consensus among others.

So next week as we continue to consider pedagogy and ‘the office’ we will look at authentic learning. In the spirit of the project if you would like some pre-reading I would recommend you read ‘Authentic Learning for the 21st Century: An Overview’ By Marilyn M. Lombardi (Educase 2007).

photo of bristol with colourful houses
Teaching Stories

Urban Spaces. Civic University.

The University of Bristol has pledged to make the city a better place1. Our research institutes are leading the charge to action this2, but how can we connect our research to our teaching? How can we support our students to consider the relevance and applicability of their studies to the real world on their doorstep? 

Here are four innovative ways that you can think about engaging your students with the idea of the “civic university”. Shared resource templates to support these approaches are available from BiLT, such as risk assessments, health and safety guidance, photography and film consent forms, and UoB’s indemnity insurance. 

1. Primary data collection 

Primary data collection in the city can be tailored to suit a broad range of subjects. In Chemistry, first year students ascend ladders to check air quality monitors. In Archaeology, students visit local cemeteries and record observations of burial sites such as demographics and mortality rates.   

Most data collection has simple requirements: notebook, phone camera and a space for sharing the data. This type of fieldwork is well suited to formative groupwork but can also contribute to summative assessment. 

The benefits of incorporating primary data collection early in the undergraduate curriculum include: 

  • Improves confidence in handling primary data and conducting research; 
  • Develops teamworking skills; 
  • Provides an opportunity for transferable skills such as film making and good health and safety practice. 

Staff can consider using this data within their research so that students’ research is seen to be valued and incorporated into larger projects. This enhances students’ sense of the value of their coursework. 

2. Designing for the city 

Designing for the city can include civil engineering projects, temporary city installations and exhibitions, and embedded urban technologies, to name a few.  

The tools needed for this approach can range from simple pen, paper and observational walks, to advanced design software packages. It can be purely classroom based, or engage with external organisations. The permutations are endless. But at the core is the ethos of creating an asset for a defined public space. 

By choosing a specific space or type of space for the asset, students need to keep in mind the limitations of that space. This approach works well in groups, with dedicated groupwork sessions supported by staff.  

A suggested facet of this approach is to “throw a spanner in the works” in the middle of the project. For example, telling students that their planned asset must make a 20% reduction in budget, to reflect real world dynamic challenges. 

The benefits of the design approach include: 

  • Enhances appreciation for the complexity of applying theoretical learning into real world contexts; 
  • Develops adaptability in challenging circumstances; 
  • Increases creativity and innovation skills. 

This approach can also invite direction from external collaborators who suggest assets for students to develop to meet particular needs. This might include local community groups or Bristol City Council. This relevance can support students’ improved sense of the value of their studies.  

3. Equitability and Sustainability 

Take students on a series of local fieldtrips across Bristol, incorporating observation and primary data collection. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a useful framework for considering how your subject relates to social, environmental and economic challenges faced in different ways in different city districts. 

You can take students on walks, on public buses or hire buses, depending on your budget and accessibility requirements. Sites might include the industrial landscape of Avonmouth, the historic harbour and docks, the mix of nature and residential in St Werburgh’s, or the Clifton bubble. 

Students can be tasked with seeing how their subject relates to the SDGs in the applied context of the city. This approach can be delivered as an “outdoor lecture” or through directed tasks for students to conduct in the various outdoor settings, perhaps with printed template worksheets. 

The benefits of this approach include: 

  • Enhances cohort cohesion, as students undertake a shared experience; 
  • Encourages engagement with themes of sustainability and global challenges; 
  • Greater understanding of the lived experiences of people from different socio-economic backgrounds. 

This approach works well as a shared start of term activity that brings the whole cohort together and is then integrated into successive classroom sessions as a point of reference. It can also invite co-delivery with external organisations visited during fieldtrips. 

Specific questions posed to students could include: 

  • How should we innovate the city to prepare it for the future? This might consider rising sea levels, emerging technologies, increased populations, housing shortages, changing demographics, transport, etc. 
  • Is Bristol a City for All? This might consider designed abelism, economic zones and divisions, the density and provision of healthcare, etc.  

4. Haptic experiences

Space for reflection and the individual experience is intrinsically valuable. One way to invite introspection is to consider haptics (see Paterson 2007). This considers the sensorial world created in different places in the city, the sights, sounds, smells, textures and “Bristol vibe”.  

Students can take theoretical concepts of phenomenology3 and sensorality and apply them to lived personal experiences, expressed through personal reflective writing. Sites can be visited multiple times to see how weather, events, and the time of year affect the experience of space, place and meaning. For example, St Nicholas’ market visited on a Monday morning is an entirely different space to a Saturday Christmas fair. Landscapes too are dynamic and ever changing, where a summer stream can transform a winter river. 

Haptic investigations can impact new ways of understanding the world and invite fluid readings of space and time. It can also challenge recorded experiences in the literature. For example, antiquarian explorers recorded their observations from the subjectivity of an able-bodied male (Johnson 2012). Students can be tasked with questioning urban spaces from other perspectives, such as from the viewpoint of women, children, or the elderly. 

We can also invite intercultural dialogue in understanding the senses, as they are both physically and culturally perceived (Classen 1997: 401-410). The senses are not confined to the five we learn in school (sight, hearing, taste, touch, smell), they extend to inclination, temperature, acceleration, hunger, time, etc. How these senses are externally controlled or created can be queried, such as through the design of public spaces. 

References: 

  • Paterson, M. 2007. The Senses of Touch: Haptics, affects and technologies. Oxford: Berg 
  • Johnson, M.H. 2012 ‘Phenomenological Approaches in Landscape Archaeology’ Annual Review of Anthropology 41, pp. 269-284 
  • Classen, C. 1997 ‘Foundations for an anthropology of the senses’ International Social Science Journal 49(153), pp. 401-412 

Footnotes:

  1. http://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2019/february/civic-agreement.html 
  2. For example, the Cabot Insitute’s City Futures theme https://www.bristol.ac.uk/cabot/what-we-do/city-futures/ 
  3. One’s personal experience of a place, including one’s feelings, emotions and senses.

Coming soon- a podcast, ‘The City as a Learning Space’ – only available on the BILT Broadcast Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Soundcloud.

Ash Tierney





Meet the BILT Fellows

Meet the BILT Fellows: Jonas Langner

We asked our Fellows to write us a short blog about their background and what they are doing as part of their BILT Fellowship. The following blog is from Jonas Langner, who has been a BILT Fellow since February 2018.

As the German Language Director in the School of Modern Languages I oversee all German language teaching offered at the University of Bristol, ie German language classes for students of German and those attending classes as part of the University-wide Language Programme. This also entails the setting of exams assessing the four skills (reading, writing, speaking and listening) plus translation. Very often, language papers are designed in a way that test the student’s language skills by asking them to fill in the gaps with the correct verb form or translating a text without access to a dictionary. I am sure that everyone who has ever attempted to learn a language will have come across those exercises. While these tasks allow the learner to check their declarative grammar and vocabulary knowledge, both examples do not really test their procedural knowledge and do not really serve any other purpose other than enabling the tutor to award a mark.

This established and very traditional approach should come as a surprise, as languages are first and foremost a tool for communication. There should be plenty of opportunities to assess languages in contexts that at least simulate a dialogue with someone else, thereby trying to replicate a real-world situation.

With that in mind, I redesigned the translation-into-German part of our degree programme last summer by replacing it with mediation tasks. Students are no longer asked to translate a text into German in exam conditions, ie on their own and without a dictionary, as I think that this is neither a realistic nor an authentic task, and very few of them will ever work as translators into German. Instead, they are now given a specific situation and target readership for which they have to paraphrase an English text into German (the German term for this is ‘Sprachmittlung’). This requires students to reduce the text to the most important and relevant information for their readers, and enables them to be more flexible with the use of vocabulary and phrases. Furthermore, they have to ensure that the register and text type they use is appropriate to the given scenario. I can easily imagine graduates having to do something similar in their jobs – either in written or spoken form – even if they have to do it within English. Thus, this task should prepare them for work, an important aspect given the need to ensure the employability of our students.

Starting as a BILT fellow in February was a welcome opportunity to research the field of assessment further. Given my experience outlined above, I quickly decided to look into authentic assessment, with the aim of introducing further real-life tasks into the German programme, but also to come up with recommendations for the institution as a whole. A good starting point to familiarise oneself with this concept is the article “A Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment” by Judith T. M. Gulikers, Theo J. Bastiaens and Paul A. Kirschner (2004) in Educational Technology Research and Development, 52 (3), pp. 67-86.

The publication date of this article shows that this is not a brand-new concept and has been around long before the debate about the ‘employability’ of university students started to dominate the discussion in higher education. This surprised me, as authentic assessment has never been a theme for any of the conferences on modern languages teaching in the UK in recent years.

One of the aspects discussed by Gulikers et al. is that authentic assessment should take place in a “physical or virtual context [that] resembles […] professional practice” (73). This is where – in my view – the challenge for German and languages as a degree subject generally lies. Our students go into a wide range of different careers, ranging from banking through law to teaching and translating. This poses the question of what “professional practice” we should prepare our students for.

I hope that looking at the subject benchmark statement for languages, cultures and societies by the QAA  and the report on “Global Graduates” – which students doing languages and spending a year abroad should be – by the Association of Graduate Recruiters, the Council for Industry and Higher Education and CFE Research and Consulting (http://www.ncub.co.uk/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&category_slug=publications&alias=42-global-graduates-into-global-leaders&Itemid=2728), as well as getting more information from the University’s Management Information Team about the careers our students go into will leave me better placed to answer that question. Together with my research into authentic assessment, my goal is to come up with practical ideas of how to change the way we currently assess to arrive at assessment that is more authentic and therefore more useful to our students.

Meet the BILT Fellows

Meet the BILT Fellows: Jenny Lloyd

We asked our Fellows to write us a short blog about their background and what they are doing as part of their BILT Fellowship. The following blog is from Jenny Lloyd, who has been a BILT Fellow since February 2018.

Is it always a good idea to make students’ lives easier?

Last week, I found myself invigilating a mock exam and, as I watched the students wrestle with their papers, I found myself reflecting upon a couple of items that I heard recently on BBC Radio 5. The first was a suggestion that the timing of the school day should be changed to reflect the teenage tendency to stay up late and sleep late into the morning. Apparently, as teenage biorhythms differ significantly from those of very young children and adults, they learn more effectively later in the day[1].  It was therefore proposed that the school day for teenagers should be shifted so that they could be taught in the afternoon and early evening. The second item noted a study which suggested that students’ reliance on digital devices has resulted in a large number being unable to tell the time using a dial-based clock[2].  As things stood, students would soon be taking exams, some of which would be scheduled in the morning and some in rooms with clocks of the old-fashioned kind with a face and hands.  Common to both items was the concern that, with exam season looming, clearly something should be done to address these conditions as they might negatively impact upon student performance.

Responses from listeners to the station were classically varied: ranging from sympathy and disbelief to disdain and outrage. Some said that everything possible should be done to support students at such a stressful period in their lives, while others questioned the value of an education system where students striving to achieve academic excellence struggled with something so basic as getting up in the morning or reading the time from a conventional clock.

Initially, on hearing these items, my first reaction was to see some value the suggestions. Surely, I thought, we should at least consider offering academic input when the students are most receptive. It also seemed logical that the clocks should present the time in the ‘language’ that students are familiar with. We wouldn’t use a clock labelled with Greek numerals or binary numbers, so what’s the problem? And, after all, the students aren’t being assessed on their ability to tell the time… but then I thought, are they?

The latter question came from some reading I had recently undertaken around the subject of ‘authentic assessment’.  Authentic assessment, according to Gulikers, Bastiaens and Kirschner (2004)[3], is defined as that which is designed to marshal a range of knowledge, skills and attitudes, and apply them to a ‘criterion situation’, ie a type of situation that they might encounter in their professional life. The classic written exam – the sort that I was invigilating – is the sort most often criticized for a lack of authenticity. Conducted in an artificially-created environment, it is thought that exams fail to mirror what students encounter once they leave school, college or university, and are therefore considered to be a poor predictor of success in later life.

Yet, I reflected, when it comes to authenticity, it is worth acknowledging that exams do test skills that sometimes fly under the academic radar. For example, they test personal organization through students’ ability to schedule revision, get themselves to the right place at the right time and with the right tools to perform the task.  They also test skills like the ability to read and understand a task and respond correctly. Finally, yes, they test the ability to read the time, perhaps ‘translate’ analogue to digital time if necessary, and manage their time in the exam room effectively.

Although the changes proposed by the studies were made with the best of intentions, their unintended consequences might actually be more damaging in the long run. Removal of apparent ‘challenges’ such as reading clocks or getting up early would destroy some of the few elements of authenticity that exist in the relatively sterile environments of classrooms and exams – indeed, it would make them more sterile. Life outside of school and university requires students to perform complex tasks in less-than-optimal conditions.  I suggest that by smoothing every academic bump they encounter we might deprive them of the opportunity to employ life skills that are much more valuable to them in the long term than gaining the odd percentage point here or there.

Now, please don’t get me wrong, when it comes to teaching and assessment I don’t think we should purposely make life difficult for students; I just think that it shouldn’t be made artificially ‘right’ either.

[1] Kelley, P. and Lee, C., 2015. Later Education Start Times in Adolescence: Time for Change. Education Commission of the States.

[2] Busby, E. (2018) ‘GCSE and A-level students cannot tell time on traditional analogue clock, teachers suggest’. The Independent online,  Weds, 25th April [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/gcse-alevel-students-time-analogue-clock-exam-halls-struggle-teachers-a8321496.html] accessed 01/05/18

[3] Gulikers, J.T., Bastiaens, T.J. and Kirschner, P.A., 2004. A five-dimensional framework for authentic assessment. Educational technology research and development52(3), p.67.