Increasing student assessment flexibility using WebCT and computer assisted assessment technologies

Physics 113/114/115 are first year units offered by the Department of Applied Physics to a wide range of students in various disciplines, such as Applied Chemistry, Applied Geology, Biological Science, Cartography, Engineering and Science Enabling Course, Food Science and Technology, Health and Safety, Health Science, Medical Imaging Science, Mine and Engineering Surveying, etc. A survey conducted in October 2000 and further feedback from students revealed many issues, which students believed were directly or indirectly affecting their academic performance. As a result of these concerns, the units have been substantially restructured into a modular format in order to increase students' choice of units, reduce student workload and change the lecture time from evening to morning and afternoon to suit students' needs. The survey also revealed that 58% of the full time students work either part time or full time and therefore are time disadvantaged as compared to their full time non-working colleagues. In response to these concerns the units have been redesigned to include flexible assessment by replacing two one-hour tests with (3 or 6) 45 minutes module tests. Each test is available to students in the Computer Assisted Assessment (CAA) Lab from 8 am to 5 pm over a period of one week, following the completion of lectures in each module. The supervised environment of the CAA Lab provides a secure environment for testing while giving students greater time flexibility

Students' feedback of teaching: Why the differences in responses?

It is well known that feedback plays an essential role in students' learning processes and assessment practises. Similarly feedback from students is important to instructors wanting to improve their teaching. Curtin's online survey instrument named "eVALUate", is designed to gather feedback from students about their perceptions of their learning experiences. It is assumed that after one semester students would have a very good idea about their learning experiences, unit learning outcomes and teaching quality. However, our data reveals that students show a wide range of responses to some of the survey items, although they were exposed to the same learning environment and instructor. It appears that students have differing interpretations of the meanings of items in the survey instrument. This presentation will discuss such variations in students' perception of items of the survey instrument, and possible reasons about why they occur

Modular teaching and flexibile assessment

Physics 113/114/115 is an introductory physics unit offered to a wide range of first year science students in various disciplines across the university. The full unit is offered in 6 modules. Since the students come from a wide range of academic backgrounds, learning attitudes and work commitments, they can opt to take 3 modules per semester (slow track) or 6 modules per semester (fast track). The assessment is based on module tests, laboratory work and a final examination. The main feature of this unit is the flexible assessment in module tests using WebCT. Each module test is available to students in the Computer Assisted Assessment (CAA) Laboratory on WebCT from 8 am to 5 pm over a period of one week, following the completion of lectures in each module. The supervised environment of the CAA Lab provides a secure environment for testing while giving students greater time flexibility. The unit has been running for the past two years. This paper will discuss various aspects of the unit in terms of implementation, outcomes, student feedback and demand on staff time

Supporting Student Learning and Retention in Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Computing – An Evaluation of Curtin University's Science Clinics Program

The clinics were originally designed for students of physics, chemistry, mathematics and computing to enhance student learning and retention, particularly in their first year, and to identify students at risk early. An evaluation of the clinics was instigated in 2009. A survey was designed around issues raised by observations, in informal conversations with tutors (usually senior students) and with students who attended the clinics. The survey was administered to students attending clinics in all four disciplines- 49 students had responded by the end of April 2010. In addition, tutors and clinics coordinators were formally interviewed. Overall the results of the evaluation are positive: whilst clinics do not identify struggling students - since these students rarely attend, student feedback indicates that clinics have significantly improved student learning for those experiencing difficulties and who might otherwise have dropped out in the past due to a perceived lack of support and success. The clinics’ efficacy is evidenced through students’ tendency to attend clinics more than once and through positive student feedback on both clinics and tutors. The process of careful selection of tutors – based on tutoring skills rather than content knowledge – was identified as a crucial ingredient of the clinics’ success

Improving teaching and learning in undergraduate science: Some research and practice

Research has shown that traditional methods of teaching science (lectures, laboratories and problem solving tutorials) are ineffective in promoting conceptual change and are inadequate or unsuitable for many students. Together with a growing number of colleagues around the world, members of the Physics Education Research and Development Group at Curtin University of Technology have attempted to address some of these issues by incorporating, or developing and evaluating, innovative teaching practice in their courses. Teaching innovations, such as the implementation of a ‘studio’ model, are being researched to examine their effectiveness in changing students’ understandings of fundamental concepts. These innovations integrate theory, experiment and problem solving activities in a student-centred ‘hands-on’ learning environment based on a constructivist epistemology. This paper discusses some of the reasons for embarking on research into university science teaching and learning. It outlines the guiding principles and then describes some of the current projects and lessons we have learnt, which have led to improvements in student learnin

Designing a comprehensive rubric for laboratory report assessment

Assessment moderation processes play a vital role in maintaining quality assurance for university courses. These processes ensure that the assessment is consistent, reproducible and transparent. They also assure students that their work is assessed with fairness and addresses the stated learning outcomes. In line with Curtin's Assessment & Moderation Policy, we applied a moderation process to first-year science enabling units. One of the major assessment components of these units is the laboratory work, which involves taking a wide range of measurements of physical quantities with due regard to measurement uncertainties, analysing the data, calculating the results and interpreting the results. The students then present their work in a formal scientifically written report to their laboratory demonstrator for assessment. The students' reports are assessed using a specific rubric which is available to students and the demonstrators through Blackboard at the beginning of the semester. To gauge any variations in marking, eight demonstrators and two staff members were provided with a set of six de-identified laboratory reports for marking using the current rubric. The results obtained showed that the percentage standard deviation of all the demonstrators varied from 18% to 42% from the mean value. We believe this may be due to a wide range of demonstrators' experience and background knowledge and also whether they have completed the annually run Curtin's Laboratory Demonstrators' Workshop. In consultation with the Office of the Dean of Teaching and Learning, the current rubric was re-designed to show a further breakdown of marks for future use.Following discussion with demonstrators and staff the re-designed rubric was accepted with some modifications. To check the validity and reliability of the new rubric, another set of six reports were marked by the same assessors. In this presentation we will discuss the results of the current and the modified rubric

Preparing Demonstrators for First Year Science Laboratories

The laboratory class is a unique learning environment with the potential to achieve a number of theoretical and practical learning objectives. Consequently, the demands on students are also great. They must not only learn manipulative and experimental techniques, but also link theory to practice, problem-solve, interpret data, interact with staff and other students, and successfully navigate the lab itself. Learning in this situation can be greatly assisted by an instructor who is able to guide students through this complex of practical, cognitive and affective issues.1,2 Frequently though, these laboratory sessions are taught by some of the least experienced members of the teaching staff. In the Department of Applied Chemistry at Curtin, we prepare our demonstrators by using a four stage process: (i) a full day workshop on teaching in labs, (ii) a half day safety and laboratory induction, (iii) use of a demonstrators' preparation sheet and (iv) weekly group meetings. Details of these activities will be provided in this paper