Search

Consensus moderation, where collaboration and discussion take place to reach an agreement on mark allocation, is a frequently used approach to quality assurance in higher education. This study explored expert academics' perceptions of consensus moderation through 12 semi-structured open-ended interviews. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and resulted in six themes: accept that marking is subjective; consensus moderation is a learning process; use calibration to develop and maintain standards; moderation is core academic work; resources are needed to enable consensus moderation; and different moderation practices are needed for different moderation purposes. Consensus moderation is a complex activity with many challenges, and the findings from this study contribute to our current understanding of consensus moderation. The findings have implications for policy and practice, and have identified ways in which we can enhance consensus moderation practice.

Consensus moderation, where collaboration and discussion take place to reach an agreement on mark allocation, is a frequently used approach to quality assurance in higher education. Unit coordinators play a vital role in facilitating consensus moderation, yet limited research has focused on their role in moderation practices. This study explored unit coordinators' perceptions and experiences of consensus moderation in Australian higher education through five focus groups. Using Foucauldian discourse analysis, data analysis identified three discursive constructions of consensus moderation situated in the wider discourse of the neoliberal university: a truly collaborative process, an illusion, and a process to manage markers. Unit coordinators in this study were positioned as either supportive, compliant but ineffective, or powerful. In contrast, markers were positioned as helpful and compliant although inexperienced and needing support; uncooperative, resistant, troublesome and demanding; or inexperienced and malleable. This paper has identified varied knowledge and understanding of consensus moderation processes and practice. These findings can inform moderation policy and practices and unit coordinator professional development.

Consensus moderation, where collaboration and discussion take place to reach an agreement on mark allocation, is a frequently used approach to quality assurance in higher education. This study explored expert academics' perceptions of consensus moderation through 12 semi-structured open-ended interviews. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and resulted in six themes: accept that marking is subjective; consensus moderation is a learning process; use calibration to develop and maintain standards; moderation is core academic work; resources are needed to enable consensus moderation; and different moderation practices are needed for different moderation purposes. Consensus moderation is a complex activity with many challenges, and the findings from this study contribute to our current understanding of consensus moderation. The findings have implications for policy and practice, and have identified ways in which we can enhance consensus moderation practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid uptake of technology is changing the way health professionals provide care to patients and communities. While this presents opportunities to improve, enhance, and positively transform care and treatment, graduates must have the requisite knowledge, skills, and attitudes to make effective use of the technology and data available to them. This research explored nursing students' self-reported digital literacy levels. We undertook a student survey at one university in Australia, utilizing the validated Self-Assessment Nursing Informatics Competencies Scale-SF30 instrument. Overall, 90% of students rated their basic computer knowledge and skills as at least "competent" including performing basic troubleshooting, using the Internet, and conducting online literature searches. However, only 55% of students considered their overall applied computer skills as at least "competent," which included using applications for diagnostic coding and to extract data from clinical data sets. Students have digital literacy in everyday settings; however, their ability to translate this into practice is limited, restricting their access to and use of digital tools in the workplace. Our findings provide the opportunity to address practice issues related to digital literacy and to embed appropriate content in curricula to enable the delivery of improved patient care and the appropriate use of data in various settings., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)