assessment pedagogy
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

20
(FIVE YEARS 7)

H-INDEX

5
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-53
Author(s):  
Kelly Anne Parkes ◽  
Jared Robert Rawlings

In this study, we report what music teacher educators (MTEs, N = 149) in higher education understand about assessment. We include their assessment pedagogy, their levels of assessment pedagogy efficacy (APE) at both programmatic (unit level) and personal levels (ProAPE and PeAPE respectively), and the relationship this efficacy has with their (MTEs) satisfaction of assessment pedagogies within their institutions. This mixed-methods study uses a convergent parallel design, with qualitative inductive coding and quantitative factor analyses, correlational analyses, and non-parametric tests. We determine that MTEs report some misunderstanding of the assessment lexicon nevertheless they hold mostly high levels of both personal and programmatic assessment pedagogy efficacy. Differences were observed between MTEs that graduated after 2008 than those who graduated prior to 2008. Findings center on higher education faculty comfort with assessment in higher education with implications for professional development and continued research in the area.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-33
Author(s):  
Kelly Dockerty

Abstract In a fast-evolving Higher Education (HE) landscape amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for a Lecturer in Education to be dynamic and innovative with assessment pedagogy is no longer a desired skill but mandatory. In response to the demand from students as consumers and other key stakeholders, our innovative and somewhat artistic license in the learning context. At the student-facing edge of HE, Lecturers react to the ever-changing landscape with dynamism to positively impact the student experience. These continued efforts to provide the best student experience, enables HE institutions to remain competitive with Initial Teacher Education (ITE) provision as part of a cutthroat consumer driven marketplace. This article will present how video as a form of artistic communication supported year one ITE students to make sense of institutional assessment methods. Qualitatively, this research was focused on student perceptions gathered through a questionnaire. Student accounts expressed overwhelmingly that the use of video as a form of communication was easier to understand than written formats. The article concludes that to support a diverse student population at a distance and online, a choice of artistic assessment formats including video should be provided. The evidence herein shows that both student understanding and outcomes of assessment were statistically improved and that the format itself facilitated a willingness to engage online in a purposeful way with assessment. Students also repeatedly revisit assessment materials embedded in a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE).


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tharindu R. Liyanagunawardena ◽  
Karsten Lundqvist ◽  
Richard Mitchell ◽  
Steven Warburton ◽  
Shirley A. Williams

Abstract In recent years there has been a significant growth in the number of online courses known as MOOCs available via online providers such as edX and Coursera. The result has been a marked reduction in the clarity around the different course offerings and this has created a need to reconsider the classification schemes for MOOCs to help inform potential participants. Many classifications have been proposed which cover the needs of academics and providers but may not be suitable for learners choosing a course. In this paper, the various classifications used by MOOC providers and aggregator services to categorise MOOCs in presenting information to prospective learners are gathered and analysed. As a result, 13 different categories are identified, which cover information provided to learners before entering a course. These categories are then compared and combined with classifications from the literature to create a taxonomy centred round eight terms: Massive (e.g. enrolments), Open (e.g. pre-requisites), Online (e.g. Timings), Assessment, Pedagogy (e.g. instructor-led), Quality (e.g. reviews), Delivery (e.g. educators), Subject (e.g. Syllabus). Thus, producing a taxonomy capable of categorising MOOCs from a wider perspective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document