Should teachers assess students’ performance in assignments or in learning outcomes that are intended in a course? Should teachers develop assessment criteria/rubrics for assignments or for learning outcomes? Is there adifference? In Bigg’s constructive alignment (1996), teachers should design assessments that obviously test the learning outcomes students are expected to achieve. This would be easy if all learning outcomes are simple. Progression in knowledge and skills development is reflected through the developing complexity of learning outcomes in the various courses within an academic program. That is, learning outcomes in first-year courses are simpler or less complex in comparison to learning outcomes in third-year courses.

The purpose of the roundtable session is to clarify concepts in assessment and further reflect on how teachers can develop their pedagogical practice. During the session, the presenters will give a short overview of literature related to the topic, present examples of assessment criteria, and initiate a discussion on the questions above.

Implementation (60 minutes):

1. Short overview on assessments and assessment criteria

2. Introduction to the pedagogical issue

3. Three examples from ongoing pedagogical development work (course materials in Swedish)

4. Reflection and discussion

5. Summary

At the end of the session, the participants would be able to understand the advantages of examining learning outcomes compared to examining assignments. Input from wise colleagues–their thoughts, experiences and ideas about the topic–would be greatly valued.

References

Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education 32 (3): 347-364.