Search

This paper reviews the literature about peer and self-assessment in university courses from the point of view of their use, and the suitability of their use, in the first year of university study. The paper is divided into three parts. The first part argues that although first-year students are involved in many of the studies that report on the use of peer and self-assessment in higher education, the proportion of these studies that do so is somewhat less than in other year levels. In addition, relatively little of this work directly and explicitly discusses the suitability of peer and self-assessment for students and courses at this year level. The second part of the paper provides an introductory exploration of the relationship between peer and self-assessment, and specific features of first-year assessment, learning and teaching. Three issues relating directly to the suitability of peer and self-assessment in the first year are explored. In the third part, the paper briefly discusses the desirability of implementing peer and self-assessment, in general, before seeking to extend this specifically to the first year. The paper concludes by recommending that greater use can and should be made of peer and self-assessment in the first year of university study.

In this article, we articulate five principles of curriculum design and illustrate their application in a third-year undergraduate course for environmental and ecological scientists. In this way, we provide a practical framework for others wishing to enhance their students' learning. To apply the five principles, we created a learning environment consisting of a broad range of learning resources and activities which were structured and sequenced with an integrated assessment strategy. The combined effect of this ensured alignment between the learning environment we created, the thinking approaches students used and the learning outcomes they achieved. More specifically, the assessment activities guided students by requiring them to recognise when their understanding was limited--and then to engage them in thinking approaches that would develop their understanding further. By providing a framework of thoughts, ideas and information, we sought to progressively enhance the sophistication of our learners' thinking. Thus, the assessment required students to integrate, synthesise and construct their understandings in ways consistent with the discipline and the professional pathways on which they had embarked. We intend that this illustration will act as a guide to other academics to adopt the same principles in their teaching. (Contains 1 figure.)

This article is about differences between, and the adequacy of, response rates to online and paper-based course and teaching evaluation surveys. Its aim is to provide practical guidance on these matters. The first part of the article gives an overview of online surveying in general, a review of data relating to survey response rates and practical advice to help boost response rates. The second part of the article discusses when a response rate may be considered large enough for the survey data to provide adequate evidence for accountability and improvement purposes. The article ends with suggestions for improving the effectiveness of evaluation strategy. These suggestions are: to seek to obtain the highest response rates possible to all surveys; to take account of probable effects of survey design and methods on the feedback obtained when interpreting that feedback; and to enhance this action by making use of data derived from multiple methods of gathering feedback. (Contains 3 tables.)