Evaluation for LearningEvaluation for Learning

Paul RamsdenPaul RamsdenUniversity of SydneyUniversity of Sydney

To evaluate university teachingeffectively, we should apply the principles of good practice in assessing student learning.

The problemThe problem

Sounds elementary...

“Chapter 2 has demonstrated that even the best of current practices are by and large not good practice...”

Lewis Elton and Brenda Johnston‘Assessment in universities: a critical review’

(http://www.ltsn.ac.uk/genericcentre/docs/Critical%20review%20of%20assessment %20research.rtf)

28

45

66

25

38

67

Helpful feedback

Staff available todiscuss work

Teaching is good

1999

1994

Source:McInnis et al, 2000

“There are no practice exercises – every piece of work is assessed, which tends to focus me on attaining marks rather than exploring ideas”

“Assessment and marking have not been good. It’s quite subjective, and group work assignments are sometimes unfair in their assessment criteria (for example, everyone gets the same mark even though one person may do less work than another)”

“The amount of multiple choice questions in some subjects does not provide opportunities to show how much you have learnt and understood.”

“We need more feedback during semester. It is not reasonable to get a mark at the end of the year and have no idea what it is based on. It is also not ideal to front up to an exam not knowing how well we have been going in earlier assessments.”

Bad practice remains commonBad practice remains common

Multiple purposes, same techniques No formative assessment at all No match to learning objectives Feedback too little, too late Narrow range of methods unreflectively chosen No student choice Incorrect use of group assessment Ignorance of Heisenberg! Standards assumed to depend on norm referencing

Interaction reliability x validity not understood

Unreliable assessments weighted less

Limited application of grade descriptors

Use of MCQs without professional training

Plagiarism opportunities not designed out – focus on technical fixes

Bad practice remains commonBad practice remains common

Underlying all this is...

a focus on the producer’s concerns a continuing emphasis on teaching (rather than learning) a remarkable neglect of existing evidence (people seem to prefer ‘dissemination and projects’ despite overwhelming proof that it doesn’t work) and a tendency to blame the student

We should try adapting these conclusions to the evaluation (and management) of university teaching.

THEORY 1

Teaching as telling

THEORY 2

Teaching asorganising

THEORY 3

Teaching as makinglearning possible

FOCUS Teacher andcontent

Teaching techniquesthat will result inlearning

Relation betweenstudents and subjectmatter

STRATEGY Transmitinformation

Manage teachingprocess; transmitconcepts

Engage; challenge;imagine oneself as thestudent

ACTIONS Chieflypresentation

‘Active learning’;organising activity

Systematicallyadapted to suit studentunderstanding

REFLECTION Unreflective;taken for granted

Apply skills toimprove teaching

Teaching as aresearch-like,scholarly process

Sydney 1999-2003Sydney 1999-2003

Assignment:

Design a system to evaluate teaching which leads to a better student experience and improved learning outcomes.

… and make it work.

The responseThe response

1. Break the problem into manageable parts

2. Design systems that resonate with values and leverage strengths

3. Align evaluation with outcomes

4. Benchmark good practice

5. Test the impact against the evidence

The responseThe response

1. Break the problem into manageable parts

2. Design systems that resonate with values and leverage strengths

3. Align evaluation with outcomes

4. Benchmark good practice

5. Test the impact against the evidence

Break the problem into manageable partsBreak the problem into manageable parts

Make goals, methods, measurement and outcomes cohere ( aka ‘alignment’)

Recognise importance of perceptions/ theories in use

Design the system around the culture (avoid one-size-fits-all solutions)

Learn from others’ mistakes

The responseThe response

1. Break the problem into manageable parts

2. Use strategies that resonate with values and leverage strengths

3. Align evaluation with outcomes

4. Benchmark good practice

5. Test the impact against the evidence

PrinciplesPrinciples

• Adopt a single, but flexible, SAL perspective, derived from research evidence. Use it to inform every policy and process

• Plan for coherence between collegial and managerial strategies

• Use an evidence-based approach to change and leadership, aligned with academic values

Mechanisms to leverage strengthsMechanisms to leverage strengths

• Academic Board reviews• Rigorous, peer review-driven QA process

• Manage teaching proactively• Funding drivers aligned with research measures and

national indicators

• Plans that work

• New role for academic development unit

• Strategic projects

Management of teachingManagement of teaching

• Teaching Dividend currently $4.5M

• Scholarship Index c. $650,000

• Teaching Improvement Fund$1.3M

• Required T&L plans– Annually updated operational plans

– Assess progress against targets

– Condition of access to performance-based funds

– Interrogated in Academic Board reviews

Criterion Description of Indicators Weight

Student progress Unit of study pass rate 2

First to secondyear retention

Percentage of students still enrolled afterone year

2

Graduateexperiences

Scores on three measures: good teaching,generic skills, overall satisfaction

3 x 1

Studentexperiences

Scores on three measures: good teaching,generic skills, overall satisfaction (annualstudent course experience questionnaire)

3 x 2

Employability First destinations survey employment rate 2

Further study First destinations survey rate of further study 2

Strategic projectsStrategic projects

• Re-engineered academic development unit

• First year experience: learning community

• Expansion of training opportunities

• including mandatory 21 hour training

• Research-led teaching, including PIs

• Evaluation and QA working group

• Graduate attributes for a research university

• Research supervision initiatives

The responseThe response

1. Break the problem into manageable parts

2. Use strategies that resonate with values and leverage strengths

3. Align evaluation with outcomes

4. Benchmark good practice

5. Test the impact against the evidence

Align evaluation with desired outcomesAlign evaluation with desired outcomes

• Rewards and recognition at multiple levels

• SI rewards trained staff and scholarly outputs

• Array of student-focused evaluation instruments, consistent with SAL theory

• New teaching awards

• Performance linked to funding at Faculty level

• Material support for changes

• New promotions policy

Evidence-based academic promotions criteriaEvidence-based academic promotions criteria

1. Fundamentals

2. Criteria Performance

Research-ledStudent-focusedScholarshipLeadership

3. Evidence

Fundamental things have got to be simple… we must look for simplicity in the system first.

Ernest Rutherford

FundamentalsFundamentals

FundamentalsFundamentals

Interest and explanation

Respect for students

Appropriate assessment

Clear goals and challenge

Independence: student control

Learning from students

(Learning to Teach in Higher Education, Chapter 6)(Learning to Teach in Higher Education, Chapter 6)

Even more fundamental...Even more fundamental...

Positive attitude towards students

Ability to communicate well

Lively interest in improving teaching

And plainer still...And plainer still...

The aim of teaching is simple: it is to make

student learning possible.

PerformancePerformance

A lecturer should appear easy and collected, undaunted and unconcerned, his thoughts about him and his mind clear for the contemplation and description of his subject … His whole behaviour should evince a respect for his audience

Michael Faraday

PerformancePerformance

Planning (e.g. effective subject design, clear objectives)

Process (e.g. presentation technique, WebCT design)

Assessment (e.g. use of variety of appropriate methods)

Outcomes (some evidence of link to learning)

Evaluation (some evidence of use of evaluation to improve)

Research-led teachingResearch-led teaching

This atmosphere of excitement, arising from imaginative consideration of knowledge, transforms knowledge.

A. N. Whitehead

Research-led teachingResearch-led teaching

Imagination and enthusiasm: a shared journey to understanding rather than delivery of content

Effective design of curricula to engage students in inquiry

Materials make use of primary sources, recent discoveries, progress in field

(“If you can’t explain it to the charlady, you don’t know anything about it”)

Student-focused teachingStudent-focused teaching

The two secrets of lecturing from which everything else follows: first, to believe that you have something worth telling your audience; second, to imagine yourself as one of that audience.

R.V. Jones

Student-focused teachingStudent-focused teaching

Use of evaluation evidence to redesign curriculum

Use of assessment data to modify teaching strategy

Focus on relation between students and subject matter

Choice of technique reflects level of student knowledge

(From “Did I make the goals clear?” to “Are the goals clear to the students?”)

Scholarship in teachingScholarship in teaching

What is needed is for teachers in higher education to bring to their teaching activities the same critical, doubting and creative attitude which they bring habitually to their research activities.

Lewis Elton

Scholarship in teachingScholarship in teaching

Systematic use of best available evidence to select and deploy teaching and assessment strategies

Publication of refereed journal articles on university teaching in discipline

Invitations to address international conferences on university teaching

Leadership in teachingLeadership in teaching

She successfully inspired us to transform the course and to re-focus on our students. She melded a diverse group of academics into a team of great teachers.

A lecturer

Leadership in teachingLeadership in teaching

Policy development and implementation

Successful re-design and coordination of courses; team leadership in teaching

Mentoring of junior academics as teachers

Application of teaching strategies and curriculum designs in other institutions

Coordination of benchmarking activity with other universities

Criteria are hierarchically ordered...Criteria are hierarchically ordered...

Non-negotiable basis: Performance

Second level: Research-led

Third level: Student-focused

Fourth level: Scholarship

Fifth level: Leadership

… leading to a structure that can be mapped on to promotion at different levels.

And the evidence?And the evidence?

Are the basics in place?

Use multiple sources (never rely on student evaluations alone)

Evaluate teaching like research– Use peer review if possible

– Use hard data when available (e.g. S of T publications)

Do the different sources tell a similar story?

Do the claims made by the teacher match the evidence?

Required

Recognised and encouraged

Administrative Academic

Required

Recognised and encouraged

Administrative Academic

Fundamental values:

• research intensive • academic-led• self-regulation• evidence base• international referencing• focus on student experience

Academic Board reviews(self-evaluation, visit,

report)Policies on teaching:

evaluation, assessment,

ICT QA, promotions

Surveys TPIs and performance fundingExternal QA benchmarksRequired training in teachingTeaching & Learning Plans

University teaching awardsSupervision awardsTeaching Improvement FundScholarship IndexResearch-led teaching (policy and indicators)

‘Guidelines for Good Practice’ (teaching, learning with ICT);

ITL courses and support groups: quality,

graduate attributes,first year experience,

research-led teaching

Required

Administrative

Recognised and encouraged

Academic

The responseThe response

1. Identify the problem

2. Use strategies that resonate with values and leverage strengths

3. Align evaluation with outcomes

4. Benchmark good practice

5. Test the impact against the evidence

BenchmarksBenchmarks

Oxford Student surveys (SCEQ), QA policies

Lund QA policies

UCL QA policies

OU ICT evaluation and QA

ANU ICT in T&L for research universities

Monash Research-led teaching PIs

Queensland Student surveys (SCEQ)

Hong Kong Academic development standards

The responseThe response

1. Identify the problem

2. Use strategies that resonate with values and leverage strengths

3. Align evaluation with outcomes

4. Benchmark good practice

5. Test the impact against the evidence

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

GoodTeaching

GenericSkills

Assessment Satisfactionwith Support

OverallSatisfaction

Conventional vs. Innovative

Old

New (SMP)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Sydney Uni 1 Uni 2 Uni 3 Others

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Demand indicator for high quality students(percentage of offers to students with UAIs 95 or greater

1999-2003)

Changes in the Sydney first year experience, 1999-2002Changes in the Sydney first year experience, 1999-2002

1999 2002 % change

Teaching staff give helpful feedback 39 48 +9

Teamwork skills developed 48 58 +10

Motivated to do best work 38 48 +10

More confident to tackle new problems 47 54 +7

IT supports my learning 56 64 +8

Problem solving skills developed 52 58 +6

Feel part of a learning community 39 53 +14

Satisfied with dept/faculty admin. 51 68 +17

Overall course satisfaction 66 71 +5

Overall satisfaction (services & admin) 57 65 +8

Percentage agreements, annual survey

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002

Helpful feedback Feedback only marks All you need is memory

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1999 2000 2001 2002

Satisfied with faculty admin. Overall satisfaction IT supports learning

Teamwork skills Part of a learning community

Oxford vs. Sydney, 3rd year Undergraduates Oxford vs. Sydney, 3rd year Undergraduates (broad agreement)(broad agreement)

Obstacles to an evidence-based approachObstacles to an evidence-based approach

Rationality in an audit society (Smith, J.R.Statist.Soc. 1996)

EBM is an example of a very uncommon phenomenon

Motivation – what’s in it for me? Focus on teaching and methods Antediluvian attitude to ‘staff development’

– yet more projects, ‘action research’, ‘dissemination’, ‘skills’, centralist policies …. itself not evidence-based

Management inadequacies

‘Staff development & dissemination’ is the front end only: management & structures are

required

Design for your users: focus on learning; have a bold vision; capture academic imaginations through trust and credible leadership

Celebrate diversity in the sector: be inclusive

Operate at multiple levels: use a systems perspective

Forget about “accreditation”

Make it easy to share good practice

Don’t become an arm of the audit society

Advice to the National Institute for L & TAdvice to the National Institute for L & T

Further readingFurther reading

(1)(1) Management of T&L, teaching qualityManagement of T&L, teaching qualityPaul Ramsden

Learning to Teach in Higher Education

Second Edition 2003 Foreword by Sir David Watson

London: RoutledgeFalmer

– – the classic text fully revised and updatedthe classic text fully revised and updated

(2)(2) Practical advice for headsPractical advice for headsPaul Ramsden

Learning to Lead in Higher Education 1998

London: RoutledgeFalmer

www.routledgefalmer.com