Thanks to funding from the QAA, Vikki Hill, Liz Bunting and myself are setting up a network of colleagues interested in compassionate assessment. The aims of the network are to support each other in bringing about more compassionate practices and policies in assessment in the HE sector. We want to share good practice, resources and policy innovations. If you are interested in joining us please join the JISCmail list https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=COMPASSIONATE-ASSESSMENT&A=1 As a starter, I thought I would share some thoughts on compassionate assessment and why I think it is important.
Fairness or equity
The problem with HE assessment policy is that we apply blanket, identical rules that need to cover a wide range of diverse students. When university students were largely homogeneous (many years ago now) this was fine but this inflexible approach based on fairness disadvantages many. One of the examples I have seen often in my career relates to giving feedback on draft work. There are often institutional or local policies that dictate the number of drafts and the need to apply this ‘fairly’ across the cohort. For example,
“Feedback should be constrained by a specific word limit…unit tutors must consistently apply the agreed approach.”
“Formative feedback on students’ learning is an integral part of the curriculum and its assessment, and contributes to ensuring the integrity of the assessment process. However, only one instance of feedback on any final piece of work for submission is permissible.”
Some students arrive at university with a good grounding in academic writing and they are likely to need far less help than the many students who lack confidence and skill in academic writing. Is it really fair that everyone gets once chance at feedback regardless of actually need?
Where is our time and limited resource best spent? I think this is an example of where fairness gets in the way of equity and consistency overrides compassion. A compassionate approach to assessment would recognise difference and be flexible to the needs of students.
Stress, anxiety and wellbeing
A second concern is about the the stress and anxiety caused by assessments and how we might mitigate this. The purpose of awarding degrees is that we are certifying that students have learnt certain knowledge and skills but I feel that HE assessment regimes have lost sight of the human element of learning.
In research we conducted at the University of the Arts London, assessment stress and anxiety was by far the most prominent feature described by student when talking about assessment and grading. This being at a university which didn’t have exams! Exams seem to create an extra level of stress and anxiety. The recent exam issue at Bath University gives an insight into this. Note the contrast in the student concerns and the university concerns:
Student: “I think the university needs to understand the stress and anxiety, performances are definitely going to fall”
University: “To ensure quality standards are met…to uphold the quality and integrity of their degree.”
There seems to be no acknowledgement of the human cost and distress. Given the growing concerns of the mental wellbeing of students and data that shows that university students have a higher incidence of mental health conditions than the general population, this seems callous. However, this is no surprise, assessment policies and practices are usually completely divorced from wellbeing and mental health initiatives. Surely it is about time we addressed this with a compassionate approach to assessment?
Is this too radical?
What I have just written seems fairly common sense and humane. Yet, I get the sense that introducing the compassionate, human element to assessment policy and process to be on an equal footing to the quality and standards element seems a radical step too far for the sector. Please join us in trying to convince our colleagues otherwise!
Neil's Learning Journey 