Online

By harnessing relevant technologies, the student experience can be enhanced through better access to assessment information, a broader range of tasks, automated or speedier feedback, student-student and student-staff dialogue regarding assessment, and support for peer and group assessment. (HEA, 2012, p.16) 

In terms of activities:

  • Can support peer and group assessment 
  • Can replicate authentic tasks, I.e. blogging, producing videos, scenario-based learning, etc 
  • Various media formats, broader range of tasks for formative use. 

In terms of feedback:

  • Improved clarity and understanding of feedback: more accessible and potentially engaging with various media offered, and more legible in the case of written feedback  
  • Speedier feedback, especially if automated. Creating common comments or recording your feedback can be less time-consuming 
  • Variety of formats to provide more detailed and richer feedback
  • Students can potentially access feedback anytime, from anywhere, and so refer to it at a later stage in their learnign journey

Most of the challenges of online formative assessment relate to the technical aspects of using technology, including:

  • technical fails (website crashing, loss of connection, etc)
  • support available, i.e. is it supported by the University and how?
  • compatibility (devices, versions, etc)
  • sustainability: "with technology evolving at an increasingly rapid rate, aspects of it are likely to become outdated very quickly" (Deeley, 2017)

From a student and/or teacher perspective, it is also worth noting:

  • level of digital literacy needed. Support may be required with using the tool and it may be time-consuming when learning how to use it. It can also lead to extraneous cognitive load for the students if the tool is not intuitive.
  • learning needs and disabilities. While technology is often hailed as a way to address these needs and diversify the types of feedback formats available to students , some may not be accessible to everyone (e.g. audiovisual).
  • potential resistance to new methods
  • Select tools that are user-friendly and recommended and/or supported by the University
  • Set aside some time to familiarise yourself with the technology. Check what kind of support you can get (online guidance, training, etc.)
  • Look for case studies and examples of use in practice for lessons learnt and tips, and to ensure that you select the most appropriate option in relation to your learning objectives. Talk to your colleagues and the Educational Technology Team about your ideas.
  • Make sure that you set clear expectations and instructions for  your students and support them with using new activities and tools.

Black and William's strategies regarding formative assessment (Black and William, 2009) are often cited as a starting point to understand the potential of formative electronic assessment.  Indeed, most of the literature around this area seeks to understand its potential to support the five strategies that they have identified:

  1. engineering effective classroom discussion, questions, and learning tasks that elicit evidence of learning;

  2. providing feedback that moves learners forward;

  3. clarifying and sharing learning intentions and criteria for success;

  4. activating students as owners of their own learning; and

  5. activating students as instructional resources for one another. (Pachler et al., 2010)

Gikandia, Morrowa and Davisa (2011) offer a very thorough literature review of online formative assessment in higher education.

Jisc, a membership organisation offering advice on digital technology for education and research in the post-compulsory sector, has published many resources on e-assessment (Jisc, 2010; Ferrell and Gray, 2013), including a report on integrating formative e-assessment in post-16 education (Pachler et al., 2009) and resources on specific approaches to formative e-assessment such as e-portfolios or peer assessment.

 

 

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment.Evaluation & Accountability, 21(1), 5–31

Ferrell, G and Gray, L (2013). Electronic Management of Assessment: Using technology to support the assessment life cycle, from the electronic submission of assignments to marking and feedback. Jisc [Online] [Accessed 15th May 2019]. Available from: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/electronic-assessment-management

Gikandia, J.W., Morrowa, D. and Davis, N.E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57 (4), 2333-2351.

JISC (2010). Effective Assessment in a Digital Age: A guide to technology-enhanced assessment and feedback. England: HEFCE.

Pachler, N., Mellar, H., Daly, C., Mor, Y. William, D. and Laurillard, D. (2009).Scoping a vision for formative e-assessment: a project report for JISC. London: Institute of Education.

Pachler, N., Daly, C., Mor, Y., & Mellar, H. (2010). Formative e-assessment: Practitioner cases. Computers & Education, 54,715–721 

 

Need inspiration? Click the approaches in the table below.

Approach Pros Cons
  • Anonymous response can encourage student response.
  • Gives lecturer overview, more difficult to see individual results.
  • Anonymous response can discourage responses.
  • Good for large class sizes.
  • Developmental and student-led
  • Practice educator and/or lecturer can review and provide feedback
  • More practical than paper-based portfolios
  • Some digital skills required to manage and use
  • Sustainability and ease of use of platform used, if not main City technology
  • Challenge of consistency of feedback from various sources or evidence needed to be submitted
  • Easy to adapt for a range of questions and activities.
  • Students must post a reponse to see other students’ responses.
  • Quick to setup.
  • Needs clear and detailed instructions.
  • Not easy to see all responses at a glance.
  • May be unsuitable to very large classes.
  • Very flexible design.
  • A range of question types.
  • Detailed statistics and grade options.
  • Writing good questions and feedback takes practice.
  • Interface is not very intuitive and takes a bit of effort to learn.
  • Automated handling of written assignments
  • Can be used for self-assessment
  • Allows lecturers to identify extra support needed with quoting, referencing, etc
  • Turnitin reports need to be interpreted by lecturers/student, who need to be supported in how to do this.
  • Risk to rely too much on the tool rather than understand what academic writing is about
  • Develops digital,literacy and reflective skills
  • Allows students to use their imagination and be creative
  • Encourages sharing of ideas, resources, etc
  • Helps identify students who need additional support
  • Can include peer/academic comments or feedback
  • Level of engagement may vary as the benefits may not be obvious or because of the technology
  • Increased anxiety from students that their contribution will be perceived negatively
  • Can be time-consuming for the teacher to moderate and/or  comment
  • provides alternative formats to cater for different student needs and abilities
  • to support diversification of activities to foster engagement
  • may support the development of transferable skills
  • may require technical and digital skills
  • can be more time and resource intensive than other methods
  • sustainability, accessibilty, compatibility considerations
  • there are many technologies, ranging from a simple everyday tool to a specialised one to support formative assessment and feedback
  • as with any technologies, considerations need to be made about sustainability, accessibility, ease of use, compatibility, support provided, digital and technical skills needed, etc.