ENHANCING ASSESSMENT IN THE BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES  

Download PDF of this section (160 KB)

Introduction

Determining and monitoring standards in higher education is a topic generating considerable discussion and debate within government and higher education communities, both in Australia and internationally. As quality assurance audits and performance indicators become a feature of the higher education environment in Australia , demonstrating just how academic standards are determined and monitored is becoming a key issue for institutions and for teaching staff.

Defining academic standards, and then evaluating teaching and learning practice against such standards, is complex. In part, this complexity is due to the different aspects of teaching and learning to which standards can be applied. 'Academic standards' can refer to several distinct yet obviously related components of university courses:

• The content - what students are expected to learn in their particular course;
• The teaching - the learning environment created for students, including curriculum design and the resources and support provided; and
• Student performance - the levels of achievement expected, and reflected by particular grades.

Defining standards for purposes of comparison between courses and institutions can be contentious and such debate is beyond the scope of this project. Rather, the following section illustrates a range of approaches to standards taken in the biological sciences. Some relate directly to assessment and grading, while others refer to broader issues of curriculum design and course content. In addition, we report some of the ongoing challenges described to us, for which there appear to be no simple solutions.

Approaches and considerations in setting and monitoring standards

The project team asked university staff to discuss academic standards in relation to assessment in the biological sciences. The responses covered a range of topics, reflecting the complexity of the issue.

• Benchmarking - typically, comparing 'like' courses at different universities in terms of course content, curriculum design and assessment standards [see also: Benchmarking].
• Factors influencing curricula - including professional organisations in the case of accredited courses, employer requirements and expectations, and changes in the nature of the biological sciences discipline itself.
• Pressure on grades - the challenge of maintaining grade distributions, particularly in light of changes in the student population.
• Coordination of grading - processes for ensuring a consistent approach to grading of student work when multiple assessors are involved.
• Minimising subjectivity - including the potential for bias that comes from having preconceived expectations of individual students.

a. Benchmarking with other courses

Examples of benchmarking were described which involved pair-wise arrangements between universities [Example: Peat 1].

Benchmarking is described further elsewhere [see also: Benchmarking].

b. Other factors influencing curricula and assessment

For some professional courses in the biological sciences, such as nutrition and dietetics, accrediting bodies play a significant role in determining course content, curriculum design and assessment:

We have three accrediting external bodies which have to approve the Nutrition, the Food Science and the Environmental Health courses, so in considering what our clients or our students are undertaking during their degree program, we've got to tick off against what the accrediting bodies want, and sometimes that means that we have to have certain assessment criteria or tools utilised to demonstrate that point. ... There are components where you have to have industry or external governing body modes of assessing the students. [academic]

The needs of industry and employer expectations also have an influence on non-accredited courses, particularly those courses with an applied focus:

I'm setting [unit objectives] against what students will be expected to do on graduation - that's the ultimate performance. ... I have very, very high expectations. And I guess that comes again from having been in private enterprise and the fact that the kids are going into private enterprise - sloppy work is unacceptable, period ... what we're actually teaching them applies in real life. [academic describing teaching within a Horticulture degree]

Changes in the nature of the discipline is also influencing curricula and assessment in the biological sciences:

The last 50 years have seen enormous progress in linking together different types of information. You can learn an awful lot more about the fundamentals of biology today in a short time than somebody could 20/30 years ago - so we ought to be turning out people who have a much deeper understanding of the whole process. [academic]

c. Pressure on grades

A common response to the question of academic standards relates to the level of student performance necessary to be awarded a 'Pass' grade - in particular, the challenge of maintaining standards when an increasing proportion of students are either under prepared for university study, lack motivation, or both.

However, it is clear that 'downward pressure' on standards is strongly resisted.

I think having broad standards is important, and being willing to fail people is important too. It's very unpalatable - I hate doing that, I really hate it. I try and find every possible way to pass people who look like they have met the criteria, but every year you just look and you say "I can't put a number next to your name which says you understood this course well enough to pass". [academic]

We heard of a range of strategies for ensuring that as many students as possible meet the accepted levels of achievement:

Making expectations clear

We have to be much more guided in what we expect from students, so that there's no ambiguity - so they don't go off the scale of what we require of them [academic]

... at the Honours level we get mostly high distinctions and distinctions because we're setting very clear assessment goals for them, and when they meet them they are rewarded with the grades. [academic]

[Examples: Gleeson; Hargreaves 1; Meyer; Noble; Rogers 1; Taylor 1]

Providing additional learning support and resources

I don't believe it puts pressure on standards. What I think it means is you have to work harder to maintain the standards. ... such as diagnostic tools and support for students from different academic backgrounds. [academic]

[Examples: Rogers 2; Cavanagh 1; Miller 1; Miller 2; Wood 2]

Additional efforts to motivate and inspire students to learn

If you're enthusiastic, the students are enthusiastic. [academic]

We also heard of two conditions considered to exert pressure on the other end of the grading spectrum - i.e. 'upward pressure' on 'honours' grades: a shortage of scholarships and postgraduate places; and highly effective teaching strategies.

We're going to have to make things harder and harder for them (the students) to get those top marks. So we're really ranking... It's a ranking exercise, just like HSC (Year 12) ... The students themselves are going to be jostling for those top positions, as we make the courses more and more difficult. [academic, discussing the strong demand by academically-able students for PhD and other postgraduate places]

I get frustrated I have to admit, because the faculty has this ruling, that of the cohort that pass, we've got a certain number of students who can be in each of the grades. I mean, in my cynical moments I say "well why should we bother improving our teaching when we know we can't have everyone getting credits anyway?" - we're going to have to shift the marks down to get them spread; this is norm referencing. I'd love all the students to actually get better and better and better. And I think they have, you know, just with some of the techniques I've used and given them (such as) far more opportunity for revision, and getting them to be more proactive in their revision. [academic]

d. Coordination of grading

Many of the university staff interviewed described the need for strategies to promote consistency in grading as a central issue in the maintenance of academic standards.

I think that when you've got a large number of people assessing, you've got to be careful that your core of assessment is equitable. ... I always meet with the tutors about the marking scheme. And so if we're going to mark a dissection we have a list of marks that we're going to allocate to certain quality of dissection; and we err on the side of being generous for something like that. [academic]

A range of strategies for coordinating grading and involving sessional staff were described to us during the interviews [see also: Involving Sessional Staff].

e. Strategies for minimising subjectivity in assessment

Explicit criteria

The value of explicit criteria and standards was emphasised, whether to ensure consistency between assessors, or to support an individual as they assess large numbers of multiple works. As one academic commented:

I aim to be objective throughout, and rely upon explicit criteria and examples of standards as a 'touchstone'. Without this, I'm concerned that if I'm getting tired or irritable, my judgement is unfairly influenced. [academic, describing grading of large numbers of written assignments]

[Examples: Hancock 1; Hargreaves 2; Mulder 3; Noble; Ross 3]

Blind assessment

Should assessors know the identity of the student when grading a piece of work? This can be a contentious topic, and various approaches are taken - depending in part upon the type of assignment, and in part upon the philosophies of the staff involved. The arguments for and against removing the names from written work are described below.

FOR: Reading the name on a piece of work can influence perceptions of the work in subtle ways, despite the assessor's best attempts at objectivity. The individual student may be known to them, and even in large classes the characteristics of a name may be suggestive of a student group (male/female; Australian/international; etc).

AGAINST: Knowing the student and their particular capabilities is important in forming judgements about the work. If this is the case, however, the criteria for assessment should make this explicit.

It is sometimes argued that there is no need to remove names - staff are expected to act professionally in assessment, and policies for blind-marking indicate a lack of trust on the part of students and the institution. We would argue, however, that simple procedures which reduce the risk of accidental bias make a valuable contribution to the quality of assessment.

When I mark the exams, and the assignments if I can, I try to mark them blind. I have them all turned upside down, and I try not to see who it is. I think that's very important, because it's very easy to get preconceived ideas about people, either positive or negative [academic]

External assessors

In response to his concerns about the subjectivity of interview-based assessment where the assessors knew the students well, one academic introduced a system of independent, external assessors. He argued that in this case, the need for objectivity outweighed the value of having assessment by people more familiar with the course:

When I first arrived at the department, the ranking was done exclusively by staff who were graduates themselves and had been in the system for a long time. While it might be argued that because they are practitioners, or have been practitioners, that they're in the best position make an assessment, I had some difficulty with this. My view was that because they had very close contact with these students for a very long period of time ... I think there's a possibility that there could be bias. [academic]

References

See also:

Assessing Learning in Australian Universities: Quality and standards

James, R. 2003. Academic standards and the assessment of student learning: some current issues in Australian higher education. Tertiary Education and Management, 9 : 187-198.

To reference material from this site, please use:

Harris, K-L., Krause, K., Gleeson, D., Peat, M., Taylor, C. & Garnett, R. (2007). Enhancing Assessment in the Biological Sciences: Ideas and resources for university educators. Available at: www.bioassess.edu.au