The attitudes of university students on the assessment of their learning

EUROPEAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION The Attitudes of University Students on the Assessment of their Learning Author(s):Juan J. Torres-Gordillo (presenting), Javier Gil-Flores Conference:ECER 2012, The Need for Educational Research to Champion Freedom, Education and Development for All Network:22. Research in Higher Education Format:Paper Session Information 22 SES 09 C, Teaching, Learning and Assessment in Higher Education Parallel Paper Session Time:2012-09-20 11:00-12:30 Room:FFL - Aula 27 Chair:Josephine Boland Contribution The Attitudes of University Students on the Assessment of their Learning There is a widespread consensus on the idea that students attitudes towards their assessment is related to their performance. It has been repeatedly stated that how students organize their workload is conditioned by how their assessment is carried out in practice (Boud, 1990; Tang, 1994; Thomson and Falchikov, 1998; Segers and Dochy, 2006). In clarification of this statement, the revision of students workloads carried out by Struyven, Dochy and Janssens (2005) indicates that the perception of the assessment – not only the method used by the teacherexerts a significant influence on how students focus their studying and learning. Students attitudes towards their assessment would be a part of what Stiggins and Conklin (1992) identified as classroom assessment environment. More specifically to the university environment, students learning could be more influenced by their perceptions of the educational environment than by the very educational practices that are set in place (Entwistle, 1991). If we accept this premise, students attitudes towards assessment as an important part of their assessment environment, this can be considered as a relevant factor in the learning process in the university environment. The analysis of how assessment is perceived indicates that, according to their own experiences, students generally understand assessment as a way of accountability rather than a means towards the advancement of their education. Other studies carried out in different contexts have revealed that university students understand assessment simply as a necessary process to get their qualifications (Hawe, 2002); and only serves the purpose of categorizing or classifying students, rather than being utilized to diagnose, motivate and improve their learning (Mclelland, 2001). In rating the assessments carried out in universities, students are unhappy with the lack of feedback from the tests and exams they have to sit (Brown, 2007), and consider the necessity for a higher level of feedback focused on the improvement of their performance (Duffield and Spencer, 2002). The new configuration of higher education, which stems from the European convergence that resulted in the creation of the EHEA, has provoked a new understanding of the teaching and learning practices in the university environment. Teaching practices based on academic and professional competences, self-learning or the development of learning abilities throughout our lifetime are factors that separate the current teaching methods from the traditional methods on which the transmission of knowledge was based upon. In this new context, changes must also take place in the discipline of assessment (Calderón and Escalera, 2008). According to this new premise, our focus will be based on the study of the attitudes of students towards the assessment of their learning, trying to rate them based on the new teaching environment that has been born in Spanish universities. Specifically, our objective is the creation of a measuring system to gauge these attitudes, taking into account its technical characteristics, and utilizing it to provide a first description of the attitudes of university students regarding this fundamental aspect of the teaching/learning process. Method We listed 24 items on how an assessment can be understood, its purpose, use, and the reactions it can trigger. This was presented to 26 judges, experts in Education in different Spanish universities. Items could be scored from 0 to 5, subject to their relevance (adequacy of the item to understand the perceptions on assessments) and clarity (degree of clarity and precision in the writing). Other comments and essays were also presented. Many changes took place. This resulted in a draft of the Scale of University Students Attitudes Towards Assessment, including 24 items similar to Likert’s, with 5 degrees of agreement. These findings were put to 4.580 students individually from 9 Spanish universities in 2009-2010 (60,03% women and 39,97% men) who were studying different levels of 54 degrees with experience in EHEA. An analysis of the main components was carried out to explore the fact-finding structure. 21 elements were retained, which form part of the final version. Furthermore, the convergent validity (Campbell and Fiske, 1959) was analyzed calculating the average correlations in each dimension; reliability was calculated using Cronbach’s Alpha. The description of attitudes was based on the average and standard deviation, calculated on the score average per dimension. Expected Outcomes a) Fact-finding structure Basis of application: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin’s measurement of sampling adequacy: 0,856 Barlett’s sphericity test: Chid-grid=20.562,281 (p<0,001) Extraction of factors: Main components method, with varimax rotation Extracted factors: 5, with 52,88% variance explained Rotated solution: Matrix of rotated components Dimensions: they reflect different perceptions of assessment (means towards the improvement of learning, verification and valuation of achievements, and as a grading system), as well as opinions on the quality and authenticity of the same. The last subscale being the emotional aspect of attitudes (rejection towards assessment). b) Convergent validity and reliability: Cronbach’s Alpha for the global scale of 21 items is 0,71. Regarding the convergent validity, the average correlations between the items of each dimension score over 0.30, except the subscale assessment as grading system (0.24). c) Attitudes towards assessment - The perception of assessment as a learning checker (3,5365) or grader (3,3865) clearly dominates over that of assessment understood as a means to learning (2,9976). - Lack of transparency, fairness, authenticity and relevance of the assessment constitutes a widespread opinion (2,50). - Rejection levels towards assessment are considerable (3,31). References - Boud, D. (1990). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education, 15(1), 101–111 - Brown, J. (2007). Feedback: the student perspective. Research in Post-Compulsory Education 12(1), 33-51. - Calderón, C. & Escalera, G. (2008). Evaluation of teaching on the challenge of the EHEA. Educación XXI,11, 237-256. - Campbell, D. T. & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105. - Duffield, K.E. & Spencer, J.A. (2002). A survey of medical students’ views about the purposes and fairness of assessment. Medical Education, 36(9), 879–886. - Entwistle, N.J. (1991). Approaches to learning and perceptions of the learning environment: Introduction to the special issue. Higher Education, 22 (3), 201-204. - Hawe, E.M. (2002). Assessment in a pre-service teacher education programme: the rhetoric and the practice of standardsbased assessment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,30(1), 93–106. - MacLellan, E. (2001). Assessment for learning: the differing perceptions of tutors and students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 307–318. - Segers, M. & Dochy, F.J. (2006). Introduction enhancing student learning through assessment: alignment between levels of assessment and different effects on learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32, 171–179. - Stiggins, R. J. & Conklin, N. F. (1992) In teachers’ hands: investigating the practices of classroom assessment . Albany, NY, SUNY. - Struyven, K., Dochy, F.J. & Janssens, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 325-341. - Tang, C. (1994). Effects of modes of assessment on students’ preparation strategies. En G. Gibbs (Ed.). Improving student learning-theory and practice (pp.151-170). Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development, Oxford Brookes University. - Thomson, K. y Falchikov, N. (1998). Full on until the sun comes out: the effects of assessment on student approaches to studying. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(4), 379–390. Author Information Juan J. Torres-Gordillo (presenting) University of Seville, Spain Javier Gil-Flores University of Seville, Spain