If you were faced with the choice to present your work in any format you would like, what would you go for? An essay or perhaps a narrated presentation? A podcast? Or maybe you’d opt to give an interpretive dance act or perform some spoken word poetry?
In Martin Ould, Sean Lancastle and Mark Graham’s second year ‘Professional Engineering Practice’ unit, students were given exactly this choice: present your work to us in whatever format you’d like. The only restriction: you have just ten minutes to of their time.
The assessment, done in groups of around 6 students, asked students to create a project proposal for an engineering project of their choice. The project had to fulfil the aim of improving the quality of life for society, but students had agency to design a project they had genuine interest in, as well as being able to select tasks or areas of specialism that group members had. This task reflects the sort of work engineers may do in their future careers, offering the opportunity to increase their employability skills, group-working skills, digital creativity, communication skills and language skills.
One of the challenges the students on this unit – which included mechanical engineering, electrical engineering and mechanical electrical engineering (taught separately, often with staff triple- or quadruple-teaching!) – faced was managing to hit all of the ILOs in the short amount of time available. A crucial skill in many roles, engineering and otherwise, is the ability to present an idea succinctly and convincingly, and this assessment demands this of the students. When chatting with Martin about the unit, he told me that he sets a timer at the beginning of each presentation, report, essay, etc. and will only mark for the allocated ten minutes. Sounds a little harsh, but it needs to be consistent and fair.
Speaking of fairness, we discussed how there was a significant focus and redefining of ILOs when this assessment was first implemented to ensure that they were not specifically linked to any single form of submission, nor did they allow for bias in marking. If you’re thinking of implementing a similar type of assessment on your unit – one that champions student agency and choice – ensuring the ILOs are clear and well-communication is of upmost importance.
Digital literacy is also increasingly valued by employers. Since this unit looked at many transferable skills, it seemed logical to allow freedom to choose a communication channel/platform that allowed students to develop a broader range of skills. It also allowed students to plan how to integrate their content into a working draft of the group’s final product at their own pace.
Running the assessment in this way also meant that Martin and his colleagues received a lot less low or no value queries, such as ‘what is the word count’ and ‘what structure shall I use’. It also led to a much more interesting marking experience as there was a broader amount of variety – both through the students choice in format but also in topic.
So, what did the students actually choose to do? Unsurprisingly perhaps, they stuck to pretty traditional assessment methods (see graphs below), mostly utilising reports and presentations and staying in their comfort zones. But that is okay! The fact that the students had the choice in itself bring so many benefits. By allowing choice in the format, the assessment was immediately inclusive and helped neurodiverse students, removing the panic about how to submit and formatting details. Less students failed the assessment as they have agency to choose a format that suited their abilities. There were slightly better marks overall and the unit received more positive feedback in Blue.
Students also submitted an individual self-reflection as part of the assessment, looking at what happened, what they found easy and difficult and what they would do differently next time. This took the form of a self-recorded video or recorded PowerPoint and formed 20% of the mark. This task also allowed the markers to see how well they had engaged with the group assessment whilst simultaneously further developing the students’ communication and digital literacy skills.
This assessment links so well into the University’s Assessment Strategy – it is designed for all, authentic and inclusive. It champions student agency and allows for lots of choice – supporting students with a range of diverse needs and abilities, helping develop key skills needed for their future careers.
Our Student Fellow Miyambo Kabwe shares a response to this blog in a response piece you can read here.
If you’re doing a similar type of assessment, we’d love to hear more about it! Drop a comment below and let us know how you’re allowing for more student agency and choice in your unit.
