Tag: assessment (Page 1 of 3)

Computer drawn image of an opened book behind the book there are 5 people. One person directly level with the spine, two people to the left of the m and two people to the right of them. Drawn behind these people are various shapes and colours.

WiseFlow – Looking in the mirror with reflective portfolios in WiseFlow

July 3, 2023 / Chris Wood / 0 Comments

Hey there, fellow exhausted souls!

Can you believe it? We’re finally coming towards the end of the academic year, and boy, has it been a fun ride! Our WiseFlow pilot has gone from strength to strength as we support academics through a new assessment process. More importantly, we have successfully run two separate assessments using our innovative approach of using WiseFlow as a reflective portfolio – the first use case of this we know about! We’ve grown, learned, and potentially discovered an exciting prospect for the future of reflective portfolios at Portsmouth University, so let’s take a moment to reflect on the journey we’ve been on.

You may have read our previous blog post on “Unlocking the power of WiseFlow: Transforming ePortfolio assessments” where we discussed the possibilities of using WiseFlow as a viable reflective portfolio platform and the benefits a reflective portfolio approach brings. For students, this helps develop their metacognitive skills and self-awareness as learners over a period of time. Academics, on the other hand, can use reflective portfolios to assess students’ learning outcomes in a more comprehensive and authentic manner. This is all part of our wider WiseFlow pilot to provide one integrated assessment platform that serves our current (and future) assessment needs within Portsmouth University, which Mike Wilson spoke to us about recently on our podcast – you can listen here.

Teach Well and Research-Informed Teaching

This year we ran two reflective portfolios within WiseFlow as part of our pilot project – to test the water and find out if this was even possible. The first was within our Researched Informed Teaching module, which supports early career academics to apply their learning in educational enhancements into their own contexts, through reflection and innovation. Students will draw together higher education policy, research methods and educational developments to build students knowledge for their future work. Secondly, we ran a reflective portfolio in our new level seven Teach Well: Principles to Practice module, which is a professional development route for those in roles related to supporting student learning. Students in this module embark on a pedagogical journey through three pillars of practice for teaching well in higher education, gaining the confidence to critically evaluate learning and design approaches and reflecting on what it means to teach well across different modes of study. We recently caught up with Maria Hutchinson who runs this module in our podcast series, if you missed this one, you can listen here.

We’ve worked closely with these academics and our support teams to develop reflective portfolios for these modules that can be used as a summative assessment vehicle which is both intuitive for learners and versatile enough to encompass a broad range of tools which enable the course learning outcomes to be demonstrated in an engaging and meaningful way.

What the students said…

Following the submission of reflective portfolios into WiseFlow, we sent out a survey to participants to gain their feedback and views. Some of the headline figures are detailed below…

90% of students found the WiseFlow reflective portfolio easy to navigate
90% of students agreed that a reflective portfolio suited this type of assessment (compared with traditional essay-based assessment methods)
82% of students felt their own students would enjoy using a reflective portfolio in WiseFlow
71% of students enjoyed the interactive assessment methods, such as histograms, voice recorders etc.
We received multiple comments about the clear instructions that were given on how to access and use Wiseflow as well as its reliability and stability as a platform. Many users also commented positively on the functionality that WiseFlow offered compared to previously used portfolio solutions.

Students also commented on…

If there was a need to add another system to Portsmouth University’s available assessment platforms – “There are too many platforms for submitting the work, Moodle, ePortfolio, WiseFlow, it is really confusing and frustrating that is necessary to learn how to use different platforms for different modules.”
The lack of formatting transfer from applications such as Word, when copying and pasting into WiseFlow – “Transfer of formatted MS Word document to WiseFlow could be improved. Currently, the document format is lost during the cut & paste process which then requires more effort to re-format within the WiseFlow portal.”
Better integration with Moodle and WiseFlow – “I’d like to see direct access from Moodle”.

The data presented highlights the positive reception of WiseFlow as a reflective portfolio solution by students. The high percentage of students that recognized the suitability of a reflective portfolio as an assessment method, in comparison to traditional essay-based approaches and praised its usability is a really positive sign. The positive feedback on the interactive assessment methods further emphasizes the adaptability of the question bank in a traditional FlowMulti assessment to be used in an innovative way.

However, some concerns were raised by students, such as the frustration of managing multiple assessment platforms at the university, indicating a need for better integration. This all links to our Digital Success Plan to (re)design robust assessments to meet the needs of the diverse student population within a blended and connected setting and incorporate a robust specialist end-to-end assessment platform. Our aims in the project were to make it easier for academics to design assessments, easier for students to find their assessments and feedback, and support staff by reducing the manual workaround assessments for academics. During the next stage of the pilot project, integration into our current systems is a top priority and will alleviate these challenges. Furthermore, the lack of formatting transfer from applications like Word to WiseFlow was highlighted as an area for improvement. These critical comments provide valuable insights for further refining and optimizing the WiseFlow system.

The evidence is clear to see – WiseFlow has the ability to provide a viable solution to reflective portfolios, with a bit of refinement – it could be excellent.

What the staff said…

It was also vital to us that we gathered feedback from our academic staff.

100% of staff agreed that WiseFlow allowed them to develop their assessment in ways that were not previously possible
All staff agreed the WiseFlow reflective portfolio allowed them to fully cover learning objectives and meet the needs of their students
We received multiple comments about the speed of the platform, intuitive nature and search functionality which made the verification/moderation process seamless. Staff also commended the accuracy of the rubrics for grading and how new interactive elements made them rethink how they could better use this type of functionality in the future.

Staff also commented on…

Comparisons to previously used portfolio platforms – “Historically the module used [another portfolio system] which was really clunky and didn’t work well at all. I really liked that Wiseflow could be scrolled across (as opposed to clicking through each page) and the layout was great”
Design elements within the marking interface – “It would have been useful to have had the comment box movable (I work with two screens and being able to drag the box to another screen to write on would have been a nice touch – several times I had to keep opening and closing the box as I wasn’t able to see the text underneath it)”
Having more time to explore the platform – “I did not feel I had enough time to play before it went live for students, but this was not WISEflow’s fault – it was just timing”.

As an honest answer, we’ve been blown away by our staff feedback. The unanimous agreement that WiseFlow enables new possibilities for assessment development speaks very highly of this solution and its potential in enhancing the teaching and learning experience for students at Portsmouth University. The potential to create authentic assessments through the use of reflective portfolios is exciting. The accuracy of the grading rubrics was also very highly commended – allowing students to have a greater chance of achieving a clear and defined target and making academic decision-making easier, fairer and more accurate. In terms of developmental areas, the movement of the comment box is a fair point – we’ve heard from other academics about the size of the comment box before – hopefully, something that WiseFlow’s New Marker Journey will alleviate.

Where do we go from here?

As we raised in our first blog post – the reflective portfolio solution in WiseFlow is far from perfect, with a few simple tweaks the solution could become very appealing. Sadly, some of these are out of our hands and lie within the code of the platform. We’ve learnt a lot during the duration of this assessment as a project team, including developmental areas we have highlighted for the future.

The single biggest limiting factor when using a reflective portfolio is when using a file upload question type. This is limited to twelve files that are no more than 10Mb each – multiple file upload questions can be used, but will still have limits on them. We have approached WiseFlow about this for development purposes, however, we have yet to have any significant movement on removing this limit. The removal of this limit puts WiseFlow in an incredibly powerful position to offer another “string to their bow” in terms of assessment choice and would truly open up the use of reflective portfolios within the platform. Sadly, with this limit in place, using reflective portfolios with some faculties such as our Creative and Cultural Industry, where students would regularly upload large .psd, CAD files, HD video, and high-quality audio etc) is just not a viable option. Creative students will often build a “portfolio career” and we would love to be able to work with them on developing reflective portfolios, but this limit stops us. Until this is removed, careful consideration must be taken at the planning stage of an assessment as to whether the reflective portfolio is the correct solution. Further to this, other limitations must be considered – for example, once the reflective portfolio is live for students to complete, it cannot be altered, changed or adapted. During the pilot, we’ve worked extensively with academics and our support teams to iron out any issues prior to release. Careful planning and consideration must take place in the authoring phase of an assignment, which will then be rigorously checked prior to release – in the same way an exam would. This has worked at a small scale but we would need to ensure appropriate support mechanisms are in place at a larger scale.

Our student feedback gave us valuable insight into the process of using WiseFlow. Although reflective portfolios save every 10 seconds, if a student deletes a file or a piece of text and exits the platform, this cannot be recovered. Over the duration of the assessments that took place, we encountered one reported instance of this. We also had some reports of formatting that will not copy from Word documents. Again, we approached WiseFlow regarding this and it is recommended to copy/paste plain text from Word and finish the styling in the text editor of WiseFlow. Although this solution works, having formatting that copies across would make students’ work translate much easier – particularly for those who write on external documents before copying into the platform at the last minute (like myself). In terms of progression beyond WiseFlow, we’d love for students to be able to take their work from the platform and have the ability to store it themselves or share it beyond the WiseFlow platform. Currently, there is no solution to this. A “zip folder” that contained all exports and uploaded files of any inputted answers into WiseFlow would be a great starting point. Again, we’ve put forward the idea to WiseFlow, but have yet to have any movement on this.

Where do we take our pilot now?

Although these are risks with using a reflective portfolio solution in WiseFlow, the prospect and the potential gain of this authentic assessment are exciting. We’ve taken the plunge and proven the concept works, highlighting potential development areas which we really hope get some traction and we’d like to think WiseFlow will be open to listening to these developmental ideas. As for our pilot project as a whole, we move into a second phase of the pilot with a continued focus on reflective portfolios but also some other areas of assessment we have struggled with in the past, such as large file submissions. We have a plethora of training and support we are actively developing and working with local teams to ensure staff feel confident using the systems.

We continue to have a waiting list for academics who are wanting to work with us to develop reflective portfolios in WiseFlow. I find myself meeting with academics on a weekly basis to discuss potential projects and reflective portfolio solutions in their disciplines. So far, we’ve done no real advertising, and this interest has been created from word of mouth and from those who have used it as students. We are keen to share our experiences with other Universities in WiseFlow user groups, who are actively keen to explore this and want to learn about our innovative approach. However, we need to be open and honest about the limitations that this solution has at the moment. Collectively, we might hold enough power to make change happen but until that point, caution must be taken before embarking on a reflective portfolio to ensure this is the correct fit for assessment.

The potential of this solution is game-changing, not just for us, but for a lot of other Higher Education institutions across the world.

The future of reflective portfolios in WiseFlow is exciting – keep watching this space.

Chris

Credit Image: Photo by MidJourney

AI generated image of creating an AI podcast

The AI Podcast – How we did it!

March 28, 2023 / Chris Wood / 0 Comments

(Co-writer: ChatGPT)

There’s no doubt Artificial Intelligence (AI) will have a huge impact on the future of education and assessment. I can’t think of a day that has gone past over the past few months where some form of AI chat hasn’t started within the office, often causing a healthy level of debate. From the outrage of academics that students are using AI to generate degree-level work to the supposed “arms race” of technology companies to be the first to detect AI. There’s no end to topics of conversation on the moral, technical, ethical and legal issues surrounding AI.

With the Tel Tales Podcasts due to re-launch in the coming months, we thought it would be good to put AI to the test. Could we create an entire podcast episode from AI? Would it matter that it was AI generated? Is this even possible?

To start the podcast off, we gave ChatGPT an open-ended initial prompt as follows…

“Write 6 questions to ask ChatGPT in a podcast about the impact ChatGPT will have on education”

Within a matter of seconds, ChatGPT was processing through its algorithms and writing a response to our initial prompt. In less than a minute, ChatGPT responded with the following questions…

How can ChatGPT be integrated into educational institutions to enhance the learning experience for students?
What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of using ChatGPT in education, and how can these be mitigated?
In what ways can ChatGPT be used to personalize learning for students with different learning styles and abilities?
How can ChatGPT be used to facilitate communication and collaboration among students and teachers in online learning environments?
How might the use of ChatGPT impact the role of teachers in education, and what skills might educators need to develop to effectively work with this technology?
Could you conclude and summarise the impact that ChatGPT will have on education?

Looking at the response that was given, the questions that ChatGPT generated are certainly a good starting point, although very surface-level. One of the biggest critiques of ChatGPT is the lack of “nuance, critical-thinking skills or ethical decision-making ability that are essential for successful journalism” (Lock, 2022). Arguably, the questions generated cover a range of topics related to the use of ChatGPT in education that could lead to interesting and informative discussions. ChatGPT is impressive on a surface level, but the reliance on using a machine for interaction or to generate conversations could lead to a loss of genuine human connection. The ability to connect with others through meaningful conversation and interactions is a fundamental aspect of being human. The concept of outsourcing this to a machine could have detrimental side effects on our well-being and social skillset. We learnt the true value of human interaction during the COVID pandemic and the severe impact the lack of meaningful human interaction had on mental health (Okabe-Miyamoto, 2021). Without delving too deep into the content and ethical issues around this, the process took seconds to complete, with a total lack of human interaction apart from a very basic prompt. Quite a scary thought!

These responses were then fed back into ChatGPT one at a time with the prefix “Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question”, the results of this can be found at the bottom of this blog post. Again, ChatGPT has provided plausible-sounding answers to its own questions. However, it’s nothing new that we haven’t spoken about before, or anything game-changing. Essentially, it’s just a series of ideas strung together from datasets. We see themes that come up in nearly every answer around the “personalisation of learning” for students and how we can use AI to “engage” students. The overemphasis in the responses on ‘buzzwords’ really highlights the lack of real input from a human; someone who is living and breathing this – an academic, a student, a head of school, a support team, a principal etc. Can we blame ChatGPT for its response? Not really. It’s done a pretty impressive job of answering its own questions and has generated some plausible responses, some of which will be popular with teachers – such as the reduction of marking load to allow teachers to focus on 1:1 learning with their students. A glimmer of hope perhaps that ChatGPT acknowledges that a partnership between AI and teachers needs to be developed to unlock its full potential. Maybe the machines are not taking over, just yet!

“With the right approach and training, ChatGPT can help usher in a new era of personalized, inclusive, and effective education.”

After gaining our content, we used Speechify, to generate the audio. Speechify has a range of voice actors – everything from Snoop Dogg to Gweneth Paltrow and uses AI to produce a natural voice, sensing the tone and intonation of text. Although the prospect of having Snoop Dogg; albeit a slightly static and stiff version of the OG himself, hosting our podcast would be amazing, we opted for British voice actors ‘Michael’ to host the podcast and ‘Stephanie’ to be the guest. In recent news, David Guetta has spoken out about the use of AI in music and that “the future of Music is within AI”. There’s no doubt that this process of bringing AI-generated text ‘to life’ is taking the moral and ethical issues of AI writing and voice generation to a new level. Could it be the next big “deep fake”; where AI voices are being used instead of the human equivalent? Or that AI voices become so indistinguishable from the real human nuance of speech that it blurs the lines between reality and the matrix? Either way, the results were good and we’re now starting to hear the results of our podcast.

After we had gathered our audio, we placed the audio files into Logic Pro X and used iZotope’s Ozone plugin for mixing and balancing. The software uses AI to intelligently listen to the audio and suggest recommended settings. We left everything with the settings that Ozone recommended for dynamics and equalisation – based on the audio files generated from Speechify. It appears that gone are the days of building relationships with artists in a recording studio, akin to George Martin to refine and craft sound, when all that is needed is for an AI to “listen” and suggest settings, built on the foundations of those masters before. The final piece of the puzzle was to get some advertising for the podcast. We asked ChatGPT to “write a tweet for @telportsmouth to advertise a totally AI-generated podcast for TelTales including hashtags” which has been used to advertise the podcast on our social media platforms. We also asked Dall-e 2 to generate some AI artwork, with the prompt “AI-generated podcast from Tel Tales at Portsmouth University”, which you’ve probably seen before getting to this blog post. Did you even notice it was AI generated? Had we not told you, would you have known?

We loved creating this podcast. In fact, it’s brought many more conversations into the office around the use of AI and how far we can (or should) push it. Ultimately, ChatGPT is shaking the education sector to the core and making us re-evaluate our assessment methods – which is only ever a good thing! ChatGPT is great at stringing a few sentences together to come up with a response. However, is it not just generating content for content’s sake, with no real meaning? Would you have even noticed this podcast was completely AI-generated, had we not told you? Could we have made it more believable if we had “real-life” voice actors to narrate the script? The answers ChatGPT gave for our podcast were plausible and spoke about relevant ideas and topics of discussion – but nothing more than that.

With GPT4 on the horizon, will we see a ‘bigger and better’ version of this AI wizardry? GPT4 promises to be able to respond to both text and images. In theory, this multi-modal model should help the AI to understand the world we live in better and theorise more logical connections between datasets. Perhaps this is only the beginning of our AI journey in education and further supports our need as educators to reevaluate our assessment methods. As we’ve said before, this can only be a good thing!

Have we just done ourselves out of a job? Probably not. It is worth remembering that none of this was possible without that initial prompt and a “human” in the driving seat. Does the future belong to AI? Not just yet, but it’s certainly one interesting journey we’re on!

Listen to the AI podcast

Chris Wood

Follow me on Twitter @ChrisWoodTeach

References

Samatha Lock. (2022). What is AI chatbot phenomenon ChatGPT and could it replace humans? The Guardian. [Online]. 5th Dec 2022. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/05/what-is-ai-chatbot-phenomenon-chatgpt-and-could-it-replace-humans [Accessed 14th March 2023].

Karynna Okabe-Miyamoto, Sonja Lyubomirsky. (2021). Social Connection and Well-Being during COVID-19. WHR 2021. 1(1), p.Chapter 6. [Online]. Available at: https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2021/social-connection-and-well-being-during-covid-19/ [Accessed 14 March 2023].

Artwork: AI-generated through Dall-e 2

Content: AI-generated through ChatGPT

Voice: AI-generated through Speechify

Mixing: AI-generated through iZotope Ozone

ChatGPT Responses

Question 1 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “How can ChatGPT be integrated into educational institutions to enhance the learning experience for students?”

Question 1 Answer:

ChatGPT, as a language model, has the potential to revolutionize the way students learn by providing personalized and interactive educational experiences. One way to integrate ChatGPT into educational institutions is through the use of chatbots. Chatbots powered by ChatGPT can provide students with instant feedback on their assignments, answer their questions, and provide additional resources that are tailored to their individual needs.

Moreover, ChatGPT can be integrated into learning management systems to create personalized learning paths for students. By analyzing a student’s learning history and performance data, ChatGPT can suggest customized learning resources and activities that are most relevant to the student’s interests and abilities. This can help students stay engaged and motivated as they learn.

Another way to integrate ChatGPT into educational institutions is by using it to create virtual learning assistants. These assistants can help students navigate complex topics, provide additional explanations or examples, and even engage in an interactive dialogue with students to promote deeper understanding and critical thinking.

Overall, the integration of ChatGPT into educational institutions has the potential to enhance the learning experience for students by providing personalized and interactive learning experiences that meet their individual needs and interests. By leveraging the power of AI, educational institutions can provide a more effective and engaging learning experience for students, preparing them for success in the modern world.

Question 2 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of using ChatGPT in education, and how can these be mitigated?”

Question 2 Answer:

The potential benefits of using ChatGPT in education are numerous. ChatGPT can help personalize the learning experience for students, offer instant feedback and support, and assist with knowledge acquisition and retention. Furthermore, ChatGPT can assist in the creation of more engaging and interactive learning materials, which can improve student motivation and learning outcomes. However, there are also potential drawbacks to using ChatGPT in education. One concern is that the technology could lead to overreliance on AI, causing students to disengage from the learning process and rely too heavily on ChatGPT to provide answers instead of engaging in critical thinking and problem-solving. Additionally, there is the possibility of biased or inaccurate responses from ChatGPT, which could negatively impact learning outcomes. To mitigate these potential drawbacks, it is important to ensure that ChatGPT is used in conjunction with traditional teaching methods to encourage critical thinking and promote deeper learning. It is also important to ensure that the technology is thoroughly tested and evaluated for accuracy and fairness. Finally, it is important to provide appropriate training to both educators and students to ensure that they understand the role of ChatGPT in the learning process and can use it effectively. With these measures in place, the potential benefits of ChatGPT in education can be realized while mitigating potential drawbacks.

Question 3 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “In what ways can ChatGPT be used to personalize learning for students with different learning styles and abilities?”

Question 3 Answer:

One of the most promising applications of ChatGPT in education is its ability to personalize the learning experience for students with different learning styles and abilities. ChatGPT can analyze a student’s learning history and performance data to provide tailored resources and feedback that meet their individual needs.

For students who are visual learners, ChatGPT can generate images, videos, and other multimedia resources to enhance their learning experience. For students who are auditory learners, ChatGPT can generate audio recordings or podcasts. For students who are kinesthetic learners, ChatGPT can suggest interactive activities or simulations that allow them to engage with the material in a more hands-on way.

In addition, ChatGPT can provide targeted feedback and support that is customized to a student’s strengths and weaknesses. For example, if a student is struggling with a particular concept, ChatGPT can generate additional practice problems or explanations to help them master the material.

Overall, the ability of ChatGPT to personalize learning for students with different learning styles and abilities has the potential to significantly improve learning outcomes and engagement. By leveraging the power of AI, educational institutions can create a more inclusive and effective learning environment that meets the needs of all students, regardless of their learning style or ability.

Question 4 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “How can ChatGPT be used to facilitate communication and collaboration among students and teachers in online learning environments?”

Question 4 Answer:

ChatGPT can play a vital role in facilitating communication and collaboration among students and teachers in online learning environments. One way ChatGPT can achieve this is by creating virtual assistants that can provide real-time feedback and support to students. These virtual assistants can also help teachers by answering common questions, grading assignments, and providing additional resources to students who are struggling.

Moreover, ChatGPT can be integrated into online discussion forums and chat rooms to promote collaboration and engagement among students. ChatGPT can help students connect with one another and facilitate group discussions and peer-to-peer learning.

ChatGPT can also be used to create virtual study groups that can help students collaborate and learn from one another. By analyzing students’ learning histories and performance data, ChatGPT can suggest study partners or groups that are most likely to benefit from working together.

Finally, ChatGPT can be used to facilitate communication and collaboration between teachers and students. ChatGPT can help teachers provide real-time feedback to students, answer questions, and provide additional resources as needed. This can help create a more supportive and engaging learning environment that promotes learning and academic success.

Overall, the use of ChatGPT in online learning environments has the potential to significantly enhance communication and collaboration among students and teachers, creating a more engaging and effective learning experience for all involved.

Question 5 Prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “How might the use of ChatGPT impact the role of teachers in education, and what skills might educators need to develop to effectively work with this technology?”

Question 5 Answer:

The use of ChatGPT in education has the potential to significantly impact the role of teachers. With the introduction of AI-powered virtual assistants, teachers can offload certain tasks like grading, answering common questions, and providing additional resources. This can free up more time for teachers to focus on providing personalized and individualized support to students.

However, with the introduction of AI-powered technology like ChatGPT, educators will need to develop new skills to effectively work with this technology. Educators will need to become proficient in using and managing AI tools to create effective learning materials and assessments. They will need to understand how to use ChatGPT to personalize the learning experience for students, as well as how to integrate it into their teaching practices to facilitate communication and collaboration among students.

Moreover, educators will need to develop skills in data analysis to better understand student performance and adjust their teaching accordingly. They will need to be able to interpret the data generated by ChatGPT and use it to provide more effective feedback and support to students.

In summary, while the introduction of ChatGPT has the potential to significantly impact the role of teachers in education, it also presents an opportunity for educators to develop new skills that can help them create a more engaging and effective learning environment for their students.

Question 6 prompt:

Write a 200-word response for a podcast to the question “Could you conclude and summarise the impact that ChatGBP will have on education?”

Question 6 answer:

In conclusion, ChatGPT has the potential to revolutionize education by providing a personalized and engaging learning experience for students. It can help educators offload certain tasks and enable them to focus more on individualized support to students. It can also facilitate communication and collaboration among students, promoting a more inclusive and supportive learning environment.

However, the use of ChatGPT in education also presents some potential drawbacks, such as the risk of over-reliance on technology and the potential for bias in the data used to personalize the learning experience.

To mitigate these drawbacks, educators must be trained in how to effectively integrate ChatGPT into their teaching practices and be able to interpret and analyze the data generated by the technology. It’s also essential to continue to monitor and address any potential issues related to bias and ethical concerns.

Overall, ChatGPT has the potential to significantly enhance the learning experience for students and support educators in creating more effective and engaging teaching practices. While there are potential drawbacks that must be considered, the benefits of using ChatGPT in education are too significant to ignore. With the right approach and training, ChatGPT can help usher in a new era of personalized, inclusive, and effective education.

As a sidenote, I used ChatGPT to create the tweet to accompany my blog post, please see below. The possibilities with ChatGPT are endless!

ChatGPT AI-Generated Tweet

🎙️ Listen to the new Tel Tales podcast generated entirely by AI 🤖🎧 Join us for fascinating stories and insights about AI and beyond. #AIGenerated #TelTales #PortsmouthPodcast #TelTalesPodcasts 🌊🎉

A girl sitting down with a book opened turning her head to smile at the robot next to her.

AI and Higher Education: Is it time to rethink teaching and assessment?

March 13, 2023 / Stephen Webb / 0 Comments

On 22 February I took part in a roundtable debate on the topic “AI and Higher Education: Is it time to rethink teaching and assessment?”, the event being organised and facilitated by Graide, a UK-based Ed Tech company that uses AI to provide improved feedback in STEM subjects. (I dislike the term ‘artificial intelligence’ in this context, but I think I am fighting a losing battle here. In the interests of clarity, I’ll use the term AI in this blog post.)

Given the recent furore around generative AI, and its ability to create human-like outputs, Graide thought it would be timely to bring together a variety of voices – senior managers, academics, developers, students – to discuss the potential impact of this new technology on higher education. I was joined on the panel by Bradley Cable (student at Birmingham University); Alison Davenport (Professor of Corrosion Science at Birmingham University); Ian Dunn (Provost of Coventry University); Manjinder Kainth (CEO of Graide); Tom Moule (Senior AI Specialist at Jisc); and Luis Ponce Cuspinera (Director of Teaching and Learning at Sussex University).

It was fascinating to hear the range of opinions held by the panel members and by the 400+ people who attended the event (and who could interact via polls and via chat). If you are interested in my opinion of the technology then you might want to watch a recording of the debate; alternatively, in the paragraphs below, I’ll attempt to summarise my feelings about Bing, ChatGPT, and similar programs.

* * *

It is easy to see why there should be fears about this technology, particularly around assessment: students might pass off AI-generated content as their own. Critics of the technology have numerous other, entirely valid, concerns: the models might produce biased outputs (after all, they have been trained on the internet!); companies will presumably start to charge for access to AI, which raises questions of equity and digital poverty; the output of these models is often factually incorrect; and so on and so on.

But this technology also possesses the clear potential to help students learn more deeply and lecturers teach more effectively.

I believe that if we embrace this technology, understand it, and use it wisely we might be able to provide personalised learning for students; design learning experiences that suit a student’s capabilities and preferences; and provide continuous assessment and feedback to enable students themselves to identify areas where they need to improve. The potential is there to provide at scale the sort of education that was once reserved for the elite.

Note the emboldened if in the paragraph above. To obtain the outcome we desire we need to embrace and explore this technology. We need to understand that the output of large language models relies on statistical relationships between tokens; it does not produce meaning – only humans generate meaning. And we need to use this technology wisely and ethically. It is not clear at this point whether these conditions will be met. Instead, some people seem to want to shut down the technology or at least pretend that it will have no impact on them.

I have heard numerous academics respond to this technology by demanding a return to in-person, handwritten exams. (Would it not be better to rethink and redesign assessment, with this new technology in mind?) I have even heard some lecturers call for a complete ban on this technology in education. (Is that possible? Even if it were, would it be fair to shield students from tools they will have to use when they enter the workforce?)

* * *

Fear of new technology dates back millennia. Plato, in the Phaedrus, a work composed about 370 BCE, has Socrates argue against the use of writing:

“It will implant forgetfulness in their [the readers] souls. They will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written, calling things to remembrance no longer from within themselves, but by means of external marks.”

Ironically, we only know about Plato’s argument against writing because it was written down.

More recently, some critics argued that the introduction of calculators would impair students’ mathematical ability. (The research is clear: children’s maths skills are not harmed by using calculators – so long as the devices are introduced into the curriculum in an integrated way.) Even more recently, some people argued that spellcheckers would impair students’ ability to spell correctly. (It seems the reverse might be the case: students are getting immediate feedback on spelling errors and this is improving their spelling.)

Perhaps it is a natural human response to fear any new technology. And in the case of generative AI there are legitimate reasons for us to be fearful – or at least to be wary of adopting the technology.

But the technology is not going to go away. Indeed, it will almost certainly improve and become more powerful. I believe that if we are thoughtful in how we introduce AI into the curriculum; if we focus on how AI can support people to achieve their goals rather than replace people; if we produce a generation of students that use the technology effectively, ethically, and safely – well, we could transform education for the better.

Credit Image: Photo by Stable Diffusion 2.1

Self portraid of man looking at compuetr screen - where do we end and AI start?

TEL in ’22 – and looking forward to ’23

December 5, 2022 / Stephen Webb / 1 Comment

(Co-writer: ChatGPT)

In 2022 the TEL team said “goodbye” to some valued colleagues, who moved to take up different roles within the University, and we said “hello” to new colleagues who joined us. Chris, Jo, and Mike have already introduced themselves on TEL Tales, so I would like to use this end-of-year post to discuss a couple of work-related highlights: our implementation of Moodle 4.0 and, regarding the key area of assessment and feedback, our pilot of the WiseFlow end-to-end assessment platform.

Moodle 4.0

Moodle 4.0 is the latest version of the Moodle learning management system, and it includes many new features and improvements that aim to enhance the user experience and support better learning outcomes. Some of the key improvements in Moodle 4.0 include:

A new and improved user interface: Moodle 4.0 features a redesigned and modern user interface that is more intuitive and user-friendly, and that provides easy access to the most important features and functions.
Enhanced learning analytics and reporting: Moodle 4.0 includes improved learning analytics and reporting tools that provide teachers with more detailed and actionable insights on students’ learning, allowing them to track their progress and identify areas for improvement.
Improved accessibility and support for mobile devices: Moodle 4.0 has been designed to be more accessible and user-friendly for users with disabilities, and it includes support for mobile devices, allowing students to access their learning materials and activities on the go.
More options for personalization and customization: Moodle 4.0 provides teachers and administrators with more options for personalization and customization, allowing them to tailor the learning environment to the specific needs and preferences of their learners.

Overall, Moodle 4.0 is a significant improvement over previous versions of the learning management system, and it offers many new features and enhancements that can support better learning outcomes and a more engaging and effective learning experience.

At this point I would like to ask the reader: did you notice anything unusual about my discussion of Moodle 4.0?

Moving on, another major project for the TEL team has been to support a pilot implementation of the WiseFlow end-to-end assessment platform. Our hope is that a dedicated platform will allow us to improve our practices around assessment and feedback. Let’s explore that idea below in a little more detail.

Assessment and feedback

There are many different ways to assess students, and the best approach will depend on the specific learning goals and objectives, as well as the context and needs of the learners. Some key principles and strategies that can help to ensure effective assessment of students include:

Align assessment with learning goals: The assessment of students should be closely aligned with the learning goals and objectives of the course or programme. This will help to ensure that the assessment is focused on the most important and relevant learning outcomes and that it provides valid and reliable information on students’ progress and achievement.
Use a variety of assessment methods: Different assessment methods can provide different types of information and insights into students’ learning, and it is important to use a range of methods in order to get a comprehensive picture of their progress and achievement. Some common assessment methods include tests, quizzes, projects, presentations, portfolios, and observations.
Provide timely and meaningful feedback: Feedback is an essential component of assessment, and it is important to provide students with timely and meaningful feedback on their progress and performance. This feedback should be clear, specific, and actionable, and it should help students to understand their strengths and weaknesses, and identify areas for improvement.
Engage students in the assessment process: Students should be actively involved in the assessment process, and they should be given opportunities to reflect on their own learning, evaluate their progress, and set goals for improvement. This can help to foster a growth mindset and a sense of ownership and responsibility for their own learning.

Overall, effective assessment of students requires careful planning, the use of a variety of assessment methods, timely and meaningful feedback, and student engagement in the assessment process.

Again, at this point I would like to ask the reader: did you notice anything unusual about my discussion of assessment and feedback?

I inserted those italicised questions above because I (Stephen Webb) did not write any of the text in the two subsections. My “co-author” (ChatGPT) wrote the text.

In 2022, GPT3 (Generative Pre-trained Transformer 3) became a mainstream technology. At least a dozen apps are available that can provide clear, comprehensible text-based responses to prompts provided by a user. An app such as ChapGPT can write essays (and poems, and computer code, and much else besides). And many of our students will know this.

Similar technology can generate artwork. The artwork accompanying this blog post is an original by DALL-E, from a prompt I provided. DALL-E is a much better artist than I can ever hope to be.

I hesitate to call this technology Artificial Intelligence because it is neither artificial nor intelligent; I prefer the term Assistive Computation. Whatever we call the technology, though, I believe that in 2023 we need, as educators, to start grappling with its implications. Can we reasonably assess students by setting them essays to write, when apps can spit out the essays for them? What does the technology mean for notions of authorship and plagiarism? (You will notice that I have credited ChatGPT as being the co-author of this blog post; is that reasonable or meaningful?) What are the best strategies for learning with this technology?

Of course, teachers as well as students can use Assistive Computation. As an experiment, recently, an academic asked ChatGPT to generate a question in a particular knowledge domain that could be set for a first-year undergraduate essay. (The question it generated was entirely suitable.) The academic then asked ChatGPT to generate a rubric for the question. (The rubric was acceptable.) Then the academic asked ChatGPT to write an essay based on the question it had set. (The essay showed no insight, made no new points but would have received a passing grade.) Finally, the academic asked ChatGPT to mark the essay according to the rubric. (The feedback, if nothing else, was at least provided in a more timely fashion than human teachers can provide.)

This experiment suggests to me that either (i) we cut out the middlemen (students and teachers) and let AI do whatever it wants; or (ii) we work together – both students and teachers – to understand how to use Assistive Computation to improve teaching and learning.

There are many questions here. And I believe 2023 is the year we all need to start grappling with them. Another question: should educators be concerned about this technology? I’ll let my co-author answer:

It’s natural for educators to be concerned about the potential impact of technology on their profession. However, it’s important to note that systems like ChatGPT are not capable of replacing the role of a human educator. While they may be able to generate text, they do not have the ability to understand or evaluate the content of that text in the same way that a human can. It’s also worth considering that the use of such systems may actually highlight the importance of critical thinking and analysis skills, which are vital for success in education and beyond. In the end, the role of educators will continue to be important in helping students develop these skills and prepare for the future.

I (the human, not the AI) would like to wish you an enjoyable festive period and a happy New Year!

Credit Image: An original by DALL-E

Computer images of Mike standing in from of his campervan playing a guitar

Introduction for Tel Tales – Mike Taylor

November 28, 2022 / Mike Taylor / 0 Comments

Hi, I’m Mike Taylor and since mid-September, I’ve been a Senior Learning Technologist (Assessment) with the TEL team on floor 3 of Mercantile House. In 2001 I was on floor 7 of the same building studying Maths and Astronomy.

After graduating and stepping out of Mercantile house for what I presumed was the final time, I began my first job in education as a library assistant at South Downs College. There, I was tasked with developing a website to promote an annual equality and diversity festival. I taught myself basic web design, which gave me my first insight into the power of using this kind of technology in education. Although most of the apps I relied upon are now defunct (Adobe Imageready, Flash and Fireworks… remember them?), it made me curious as to how this can be used to enhance learning. In hindsight, it also taught me the important lesson that the skills of an online developer must remain current!

I spent the next 11 years at South Downs teaching A level Maths and BTEC/HND Music Performance, along with a multitude of other roles (Course Manager; Lead Internal Verifier; Trainee Teaching Mentor; plus many more), all the time gathering skills and experience, and spotting opportunities to improve college life via the use of technology.

The move toward a career in online development came six years ago when I joined the Online Course Developer Team at St George’s, supporting the online learning of the Schools of Education and Criminal Justice. In 10 short months, the team taught me an invaluable amount and provided me with excellent opportunities such as obtaining my HEA Fellowship and giving me the freedom to learn and experiment with programming tools such as JavaScript and jQuery.

Five years in the two Schools of Engineering provided a more direct experience with HE assessment. This, along with everything we have learnt from our rapid response to the pandemic, has reinforced my confidence in the value of weaving tech into education. I took a deep dive into the world of automating workloads with Google Apps Script and built ethics review systems centrally and for the faculty. I generated an enormous question bank of auto-marking Maths questions for the Mathematical Principles modules, greatly easing the marking burden of the assessment team.

Now, 21 years later, I’ve returned to Mercantile house. A lot has changed. It looks a lot nicer, and I’m 99% sure no one uses Netscape anymore. But my trip down 4 flights of stairs has taught me that we are in a great position to enhance the student experience, improve our colleagues’ work lives, and innovate across the board.

I now have the incredibly difficult job of filling Mike Wilson’s shoes, a tough act to follow. Fortunately for all of us, he’s not going too far so the transition should be a smooth one, and I’ll be assisting him in the delivery of the trial of the end-to-end assessment platform WiseFlow.

In my personal life, I love playing the guitar, ukulele and singing (there’s nothing as satisfying as a bunch of disparate musicians coming together to make a melodious racket) and camping with the family (and dog!) in our DIY converted campervan (see attached image generated by DALL-E!).

I look forward to working with you all over the next year. If you have any questions, drop me an email at mike.taylor@port.ac.uk.

Welcome to the team, Mike!

Teach Well: Principles to Practice title with the start date of the module (24th Jan 2023) plus the Teach Well arrow

Guest Blogger: Teach Well: Principles to Practice Module

November 25, 2022 / Maria Hutchinson / 1 Comment

Hi everyone, I’m Maria Hutchinson and I joined the Academic Development team back in June as a Learning Designer. One of the projects I was given early on was to create a professional development module to support the pedagogical upskilling of our Online Course Developers (OCDs), Seniors OCDs, Learning Technologists, Educational Technologists, Learning Support Tutors, Associate Lecturers, or other relevant roles related to supporting student learning.

The aptly named Teach Well: Principles to Practice module has been approved and we are actively recruiting for TB2 Jan-May. This new 30-credit L7 professional development module is FREE for UoP and will run TB1 and TB2.

Join us on a pedagogical journey through 3 pillars of practice for teaching well in higher education, and gain the confidence to critically evaluate learning and design approaches and reflect on what it means to teach well across different modes of study.

On completion of the module, you will be able to support colleagues in the fields of learning design and wider pedagogic practice, including supporting workshops such as enABLe, the University’s framework to support innovative team-based learning design. You will also engage with the UKPSF and be able to work towards an appropriate level of Fellowship.

This practical module focuses on learning design, teaching practice, and assessment and feedback, in the context of a solid pedagogic framework linked to blended and connected learning. A significant component of the module content and associated skills is practical teaching.

You will learn via a mixture of face-to-face away days* and online synchronous sessions, including workshops, discussions and guest speakers, where you will be encouraged to engage. Guided learning will include asynchronous online activities, in addition to which, you will be expected to engage in assessment activities and independent study. Key dates of online sessions and away days.

*NOTE: Attendance at face-to-face away days are mandatory, therefore, you should ensure that you have prior approval from your line manager to attend them.

For more information and for details on how to enrol, please contact: maria.hutchinson@port.ac.uk

Guest Blogger: Co-Creating Expectations with Vevox

October 18, 2021 / Rachel Chan / 0 Comments

Introduction by Tom:

I was asked by Vevox (a company we work closely with that facilitates audience response) to run the first session in their autumn webinar series. I was happy to do this and you can watch the recording of the session on Youtube.

After the session, Joe from Vevox was asked if I would mind someone writing a blog relating to the session. I was flattered and said of course. Dr Rachel Chan from St Mary’s University in Twickenham wrote her blog and shared it with me and I asked her if we could re-publish it here on TelTales. She was happy to let us use the blog…so this blog is a short reflection from Rachel after attending my webinar on “Co-Creating Expectations with Vevox”.

Co-creation Blog

My name is Rachel Chan, I am a Senior Lecturer – Clinical Specialist Physiotherapist teaching on the BSc in Physiotherapy at St Mary’s University in Twickenham. Throughout my academic career, I have always been hugely committed to Teaching and Learning. I recently listened to a talk by Tom Langston from the University of Portsmouth about co-creation and thought it might be valuable to write a short blog to share some of his key messages.

Tom began by asking us a question ‘What is co-creation?’ We were all on the right track, people suggested things like ‘student partnership,’ ‘collaboration’ and ‘support.’ Bovill and colleagues(2016) define it as ‘…when staff and students work collaboratively with one another to create components of curricula and /or pedagogical approaches.’ Great, so, Where does it work? Tom showed us that co-creation can work in many areas of pedagogy including setting expectations, assessment criteria, curriculum content and assessment design. I was already sold by this point but there are many, less obvious benefits, to adopting co-creation in your pedagogical practice.

It enables you to better meet expectations (the students’ expectations of you, your expectations of the student and more subtly but equally important, the students’ expectations of each other). An important tip Tom shared was setting these expectations as early as possible so that everyone knows the playing field from day 1.
It facilitates a dynamic approach to your teaching practice, encouraging you to reflect on what you do and allowing you to evolve as an educator. CPD in action!
It gives the students’ a voice – of course, it is impossible to accommodate all of their suggestions, no one is suggesting that you do. Phew! But listening to students, and showing them that you will try to accommodate some of them, opens the channels of communication – they know that you care and that you have heard them. This is SO important.

The idea of co-creation may make some educators feel anxious and, in some areas, it will be easier to implement than others (assessment design may be more challenging for example) but you can and should start small. Bovill and Bulley have created a ladder that models co-creation, it shows dictated curriculum at the bottom and an anarchic level of students in control at the top (ttps://eprints.gla.ac.uk/57709/1/57709.pdf). Tom wasn’t suggesting you aim too high but believes adopting some co-creation in your practice will have huge benefits for all.

How to adopt this principle of co-creation? There are many ways in which you can successfully include co-creation in your teaching such as using an EVS to make quizzes or simply creating a collaboration space to stimulate discussions with students.

My take-home message…Step 1. always try to engage your students in your teaching, and perhaps more importantly…Step 2. respond to that engagement. Thanks, Tom, I am inspired!

If you have any questions or would like to know more about co-creation, please contact Tom at: tom.langston@port.ac.uk

A tablet on a table set up with a microphone ready to record.

Using video (Panopto) feedback to encourage student engagement with assessment

October 11, 2021 / Tom Langston / 0 Comments

This blog is written by Tom Langston, Digital Learning and Teaching specialist and Dr Jo Brindley who is the Course Leader for the Academic Professional Apprenticeship (APA). The APA is a course for new career academics within the University and provides them with ideas, support and guidance on developing their teaching skills. The course is constantly evolving in how it is delivered as it was designed to highlight best practices and current ideas within Higher Education. The course, as you will see, decided to innovate and deliver feedback using Panopto. Providing the opportunity for academics (as students) to experience a range of feedback types and engage with non-traditional forms of feedback on assessment.

Tom:

While the University has always had the option of recording videos, it wasn’t until Panopto, and the integration within Moodle, that I had considered using video as a tool for feedback. That’s not to say others hadn’t done it. I know people like Philip Brabazon have been doing audio feedback (not video I know) which has received positive feedback.

So with that being said, I recently graduated the first cohort for the Academic Professional Apprenticeship and have since started working closely with the course team. I was asked to help mark a few assignments and before I undertook this I asked if I could do the feedback as a video. Jo was keen to see how this would go and decided to do her feedback in the same way (I think she just needed an excuse and possibly a safety net to do it).

We planned how we would approach the feedback and decided that Panopto would give us the easiest way to implement it. It allowed us to have our face on a screen, allowing us to demonstrate that we might have some points that need investigation but in a non-confrontational and open way. The ability to record a screen with the assignment and the marking criteria displayed at the same time helped us show how we mapped our thoughts and marking to the submission.

This was my first experience as a marker which might mean this is a little unrepresentative. Having never marked scripts in the traditional way (either pen and paper or on-screen) giving video feedback felt a more comfortable way to mark as I knew what I was saying would not be misinterpreted. Now the argument here might be that it is a “quick” option, however, being new to marking I actually did both. Firstly, I worked through the submissions and wrote my feedback about each section down, and then secondly marked it again but on camera, and read back what I had noted the first time I read it.

When we were devising this marking process, we made the conscious decision to not worry about being “perfect” and going back to rerecord mistakes. We wanted it to be as conversational as possible so it felt natural and genuine. Not everyone is going to want to be on camera, but the same can be achieved from the audio feedback I mentioned earlier.

The other nice feature of Panopto is the tracking ability of views. It is possible to see how much of a video someone has watched and how long they spent reviewing the material. For me, the eye-opening part was that many of the submissions I marked, the student watched the first few minutes of the introduction and then skipped through the bulk of the video until they got to the feedback for the final higher weighted part of the submission, which was a literature review, similar to that written in a journal article. They skipped much of the feedback surrounding the reflective elements from the portfolio they had created as part of the submission, which I found interesting as these were the areas that I felt most people needed more work on, compared to the final section which was more similar to research work they may have previously undertaken.

With this in mind, I would still provide the detailed feedback that I did as I only marked a few submissions and not every student will approach their feedback in the same way. It is something though that I will review each time as it would be an element that I would discuss at the start of the assessment process with the students to find what they might value. If they just want a grade for certain sections or if they want a detailed breakdown across the whole assignment. These conversations would be a key part in helping students to engage as if they are asking for a certain level of feedback they will hopefully then investigate each area accordingly.

Jo:

The impact of the pandemic has been a catalyst to try out new ways of working and I was excited by the suggestion from Tom that we try out using a screencast as a way of providing more personalised feedback as part of the assessment process.

I have, historically, used audio feedback and I know that this was always positively received by learners, so the opportunity to use Panopto was one I was keen to experiment with. For me, one of the benefits was that the screencast enabled four views; the assessment artefact itself, the marking criteria, the marker and the associated captions. This felt like a really robust way of delivering feedback as it was easy to link the marking criteria with the submitted assessment on screen, which assisted the learners to join the dots up regarding the award of marks.

As Tom has said, we took a conversational approach to the feedback, but this didn’t make the feedback provision a swift process as planning/note-taking was also required. I think this was useful to Tom as it was his first time marking, when we met for calibration following marking the same submissions at the start of the process, these notes assisted with our conversation. As I progressed through the bulk of the marking I started to utilise the pause facility, which I think made the process quicker (fewer notes to capture) and this didn’t seem to affect the overall quality of engagement with the feedback.

I was pleased with the approach and quality of feedback provided. There was definitely more scope to work on feed-forward and we will be providing feedback in this way during the next assessment diet. Comments from the External Examiner around this approach were very positive.

Credit Image: Photo by Przemyslaw Marczynski on Unsplash

Explore – A guide for academic staff

August 2, 2021 / Marie Kendall-Waters / 0 Comments

Considering ways to enhance a blended and connected learning experience? Looking for a resource that can provide the basic information on digital tools at UoP? Need help and support with content capture but not sure which tool is fit for purpose? Maybe Explore can help!

What’s Explore?

In collaboration with Professor Ale Armellini, the TEL Team have designed and developed a resource called Explore – A guide for academic staff. We hope it will help provide answers to questions surrounding tool selection in blended and connected learning and teaching.

In the ever-changing world of technology, it can be difficult to stay up to date with the digital tools being used within the University, and the range of tools can often appear overwhelming. For any given teaching situation, knowing which tool will provide the best solution for you and your students is a challenge. For support staff, understanding the purpose behind a given technology is key in aiding learning and teaching. Explore can help you choose the right tool for the job; if you need training on the tool, Explore points to development opportunities.

Pedagogy and technology go hand-in-hand and when a mutual understanding is achieved great things happen.

Learning types

Explore uses Diana Laurilliard’s 6 learning types and Assessment to categorise the various tools and technologies supported by UoP. Most tools can support activities within any learning type. What determines the choice of tool is pedagogic purpose in each context. Explore is a framework to guide decision making and help innovation within learning and teaching.

Acquisition – Learning through acquisition is what learners do when they listen to a lecture or podcast, read from books or websites, and watch demos or videos.
Collaboration – Learning through collaboration embraces mainly discussion, practice, and production. Learners take part in the process of knowledge building itself through participation.
Discussion – Learning through discussion requires learners to articulate their ideas and questions, and to challenge and respond to the ideas and questions from teachers, and/or from peers.
Investigation – Learning through investigation guides learners to explore, compare and critique the texts, documents and resources that reflect the concepts and ideas being taught.
Practice – Learning through practice enables learners to adapt their actions to the task goal, and use the feedback to improve their next action. Feedback may come from self-reflection, from peers, from teachers, or from the activity itself.
Production – Learning through production involves motivating learners to consolidate what they have learned by articulating their current conceptual understanding in the form of an artefact, product, display or another deliverable.
Assessment – Learning through assessment is the way the teacher can gauge the knowledge of the learners, formatively or summatively, and give feedback designed to improve the learners’ performance.

Under each learning type on Explore, we have included some examples of digital tools that are currently in use at UoP and that could be used to achieve certain learning outcomes. For instance, if you are thinking about acquisition-type activities in your teaching you could use Panopto to create videos for your students. By clicking on each tool in Explore, you will find information about the tool itself; how to access it; key features; top tips by current users; useful links to guidance and training; media such as videos; quotes about the tool from UoP and other staff; and examples of other learning types in which the tool could be used.

Feedback

We asked a range of academics and Online Course Developers to ‘test drive’ Explore within their roles. The feedback we received has helped us to further develop the resource.

To conclude

We hope both academic and academic support staff will find Explore beneficial in shaping their decisions regarding learning and teaching over the coming months. If you have any feedback then please contact us at: ale.armellini@port.ac.uk tom.langston@port.ac.uk or marie.kendall-waters@port.ac.uk

If you are using any of the tools from Explore in an innovative way, and would be willing to share your experience, then please let us know – we can include this as we continue to develop the resource.

Explore can be accessed directly via explore.port.ac.uk or within the Learning and Teaching Innovation site.

Thank you to everyone who has provided content and feedback – we hope you enjoy using Explore!

Some comments on “The future of assessment”

February 17, 2020 / Stephen Webb / 0 Comments

The Curriculum Framework Specification document, which provides detailed precepts and guidance for the design, development and review of all new courses at the University, contains UoP’s policy on assessment. The policy’s authors made a conscious choice to call it an Assessment For Learning Policy: the policy advocates assessment for learning rather than assessment of learning. As the policy states, assessment for learning enables a culture in which:

students receive feedback from academics and peers that helps them to improve their work prior to final/summative assessments;
students understand what successful work looks like for each task they are doing;
students become more independent in their learning, taking part in peer and self-assessment;
formative assessment is, where possible, aligned to the module summative assessment, in order to facilitate cyclical feedback opportunities which will clarify expectations and standards for the summative assignment (e.g. the student’s exam or portfolio submission).

As the University considers how to implement its new five-year strategy, however, and how to meet its ambitious vision for 2030, might we need to rethink assessment? Not rethink the approach of assessing for learning, but look again at some of the details of how we assess?

The changing nature of assessment over the coming five-year period happens to be the subject of a recent publication from JISC: The Future of Assessment: Five Principles, Five Targets for 2025. This report, the output of a day-long meeting held in 2019, identifies five key aspects of assessment and the role that technology can play. The report argues that assessment should be (in alphabetical order, not order of importance):

Accessible – taking an inclusive approach to assessment is the ethical thing to do, of course, but we now have a legal requirement to meet certain accessibility standards. Digital technology can certainly help with accessibility. Contact DCQE if you would like further advice in this area.
Appropriately automated – it hardly needs to be said that marking and feedback, although crucial elements of the assessment process, is time consuming. Technology can help here, too. Technology can be used to automate the process and, if the assessment has been properly designed, students get the benefit of immediate feedback. Technology might also be used to improve the quality of feedback: in this regard TEL is currently exploring the Edword platform.
Authentic – this is, I believe, a key area for the University to develop. How does it benefit students to make them sit down for three hours and hand write an essay under exam conditions? This doesn’t prepare them for the world beyond university. Surely it’s better to assess students’ ability to work in teams; display their knowledge in a realistic setting; use the digital skills they will undoubtedly need in the workplace?
Continuous – in order to be successful in their chosen careers, our students will need to keep up with changes wrought by technology. So perhaps the most important skill we can teach our students is how to be independent, self-directed learners. An over-reliance on high-stakes, summative exams does not help. Of particular interest to me, in the JISC report, was the mention of using AI to personalise learning and assessment: the technology is not there yet, but it might come in the next few years.
Secure – if we are going to assess a student then we need to know we are assessing the right student! For a long time the focus in HE has been on detecting and deterring plagiarism. Nowadays, though, we also face the threat of essay mills and contract cheating. Once again technology can play a role: data forensics, stylistic analysis tools and online proctoring platforms can help tackle the problem. Such tools are best used, however, in a culture that promotes academic integrity: we should use technology to help promote a sense of academic community rather than to “catch the bad guys”.

The five principles identified by the JISC working group seem to me to be realistic and practical. They are also, if I’m being honest, slightly unambitious. I think mixed-reality technology, for example, opens up many opportunities to develop assessment for learning. But perhaps that is more for a 2030 vision than a 2025 strategy.

Credit Image: Needpix.com