Abstracts of Keynote Speeches:
- The UK Debate over Honours Classification: Thoughts on the Burgess Group Report 3 years on
- What does it mean to assure Academic Achievement Standards?
Abstract of Plenary Panel Discussion I:
Abstracts of Parallel Discussion Sessions:
- Assessing Diverse Learning Experiences
- The Enhancement of Feedback Processes: the Role of the Student
- Assessing and Reporting Co-curriculum Activities
Abstract of Plenary Panel Discussion II:
Abstracts of Keynote Speeches:The UK Debate over Honours Classification: Thoughts on the Burgess Group Report 3 years on
| Speaker: | Professor Michael Worton Vice-Provost, University College London |
For several years now, there has been considerable discussion and debate in the UK about how best to assess student achievement. A particular focus has been the Honours Degree and its suitability for the modern complex world of the 21st century. In February 2004, a Measuring and Recording Student Achievement Steering Group was set up, which after 18 meetings published its report, Beyond the honours degree classification: The Burgess Group final report, in October 2007. This paper will chart the main conclusions and recommendations of the Burgess report. It will also outline the arguments that led to the Burgess Group making its case for change and explain how the national consultation after the publication of the report led to the UK Higher Education (HE) sector choosing to keep the Honours classification. The paper will conclude with a description of the Higher Education Achievement Record (HEAR) recommended by the Burgess Group, which is currently being piloted in the UK and explain how it is being received in the pilot universities. The paper will conclude with some personal arguments about how and why we should assess our students and their learning experiences in different ways in the new contexts of the 21st century, where internationalization, interdisciplinarity, skills development and partnership-working must be at the core of the work of a university.
Professor Worton is Vice-Provost of University College London (UCL), with responsibility for overseeing the implementation of UCL’s Learning and Teaching strategy and matters relating to quality assurance and Teaching & Learning. He contributes significantly to the development of HE in the UK and Europe, has spoken widely on the internationalization of HE, and holds various important national and international appointments outside UCL. He was Chair of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE)/Arts and Humanities Research Council Expert Group on Research Metrics, and is a member of the joint Steering Group of Universities UK, Standing Conference of Principals and HEFCE on Measuring and Recording Student Achievement. He has just undertaken a personal review for HEFCE and the UK Government of language provision in UK HE. His research focuses on 20th and 21st century literature and on aspects of critical theory, feminism, gender politics, and painting and photography. He has published 9 books and more than 70 articles and chapters in books.
What does it mean to assure Academic Achievement Standards?| Speaker: | Professor D. Royce Sadler Professor of Higher Education, Griffith University |
Quality assurance is a hot topic in higher education worldwide. It has its own distinctive concepts and terminology, and its own literature and journals. In practice, exactly what is to be ‘assured’ has not always been made clear, nor have the mechanisms by which the proposed processes lead to the desired result. In this presentation, the agenda is restricted to academic achievement standards, with the emphasis on achievement. This is compatible with a focus on learning outcomes. Typical outcomes-based approaches are not sufficient to assure achievement standards, and this presentation will provide an analysis of the nature of the problem and outline a way forward.
Professor D. Royce Sadler is a Professor of Higher Education at Griffith University in Brisbane. Since 1973, his primary research and writing focus has been the assessment of academic achievement, both formative and summative, with publications that are widely cited. The current focus is on academic standards and grading processes in higher education. He is on the Editorial Advisory Boards of two international assessment journals and regularly reviews manuscripts for several others.
Abstract of Plenary Panel Discussion I:
Hong Kong Employers’ Perspectives on Honours Classification and Grade Point Averages (GPAs)
In preparations for the 3+3+4 curriculum reform, universities in Hong Kong are reviewing their curriculum structure, pedagogical methods, assessment practices, and grading methodologies. Most universities are moving away from the traditional norm-referenced assessment towards standards-referenced assessment in which student achievements are evaluated according to grade descriptors. As institutions cater to increased flexibility in course selection and greater diversity in the forms of learning, more flexible and diverse assessment practices will be employed. While these changes will aim to provide a more comprehensive assessment and grading system, it is essential to keep student achievement reports succinct to facilitate easy reference by key stakeholders, including employers. In this plenary session, representatives from employers' groups including the public sector, large corporations and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) will be invited to share their perspectives on the measurement and recording of student achievement. Specific topics for discussion will be:
· How do Hong Kong employers interpret academic transcripts?
· What do grade point averages (GPAs) and honours classifications mean to employers?
· What other information on graduates’ learning experiences and achievements would employers
encourage universities to provide?
· What formats of reporting would be most appropriate for employers?
| Chairperson: | Dr. Albert W.L. Chau Dean of Student Affairs, The University of Hong Kong |
| Discussants: | Dr. Chris Chiu Executive Vice President, Chief Research Scientist, Global Technic Enterprises Ltd. |
| Ms. Sandy Fok General Manager, Staff Development, John Swire & Sons |
|
| Mr. Simon Tsang Learning & Education Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopers |
|
| Mr. Johann Wong Principal Assistant Secretary, Civil Service Bureau, HKSAR Government |
|
Abstracts of Parallel Discussion Sessions:
Assessing Diverse Learning Experiences
In traditional teaching and learning pedagogies, students are commonly assessed on their conceptual understanding through essay writing, online quizzes and fixed-duration sit-in examinations. However, with the introduction of a variety of new and diverse modes of learning, these types of conventional assessment activity may not allow students to demonstrate the full range of knowledge and skills that they have acquired. Therefore, the development of new or hybrid assessments of students’ performance will be necessary.
As we continue to develop our learning outcomes as part of the development of outcomes-based approaches to students' learning, issues regarding diversity in assessment practices are being discussed more and more. In this parallel session, we would like to discuss the development and implementation of alternative assessment activities and how these activities can capture the diverse learning experiences that students have acquired. Examples of these diverse learning experiences include, but are not limited to, internship, service learning, collaborative learning, international exchange and experiential learning.
| Chairperson: | Professor Chan Wai Kin Department of Chemistry, The University of Hong Kong |
| Discussants: | Dr. John D.S. Ho School of Law, City University of Hong Kong |
| Dr. Paula Hodgson Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong |
|
| Professor Hui Pak Ming Department of Physics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong |
|
| Professor Cecilia Li Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University |
|
Feedback is crucial to the development of student learning, but increasingly difficult to manage effectively within the constraints of modularized courses for large and diverse student populations. The new 4-year curriculum reforms provide an opportunity to reinvigorate feedback practices. This session aims to stimulate debate about how feedback can be enhanced, with particular reference to the student role. Issues to be addressed, include:
• Modes and purposes of feedback
• How students process and use feedback
• Dialogic rather than one-way feedback
• The role of student self-evaluation in the feedback process
• The relationship between feedback and outcomes-based approaches
| Chairperson: | Dr. Scott T. Smith Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong |
| Discussants: | Dr. David Carless Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong |
| Professor Tony Hung Language Centre, Hong Kong Baptist University |
|
| Professor Robert K.Y. Li College of Science and Engineering, City University of Hong Kong |
|
| Professor Keith Thomas Centre for Learning Enhancement and Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong |
|
Assessing and Reporting Co-curriculum Activities
As part of the development of outcomes-based approaches to student learning, institutions are giving careful thought to their institutional level aims and learning outcomes. Some of these learning outcomes go beyond what has normally been expected to be developed within our courses of study. Much learning occurs outside the classroom, and both the place and time of learning have become much less specific. Extra-curricular activities, including service learning etc. are all seen to be important in the development of a diverse range of learning outcomes. Students oftentimes do not work individually, but in groups, and share in the creation of their learning environments. Moreover, the learning of these outcomes will need to move beyond the level of knowing, to doing. These factors all contribute to the difficulties of assessing the achievement of these outcomes. This session will focus on the ways in which institutions are thinking about the assessment and documentation of learning outcomes in these activities.
| Chairperson: | Dr. Chan Lap Ki Institute of Medical and Health Sciences Education, The University of Hong Kong |
| Discussants: | Mr. Tom W.H. Fong Student Affairs Office, The Hong Kong Institute of Education |
| Mrs. Dorinda Fung Student Affairs Office, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University |
|
| Professor David Kember Centre for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning, The University of Hong Kong |
|
| Dr. Eva Wong Centre for Holistic Teaching and Learning, Hong Kong Baptist University |
|
Abstract of Plenary Panel Discussion II:
Standards Based Assessment and Honours Classification – the Path ahead for UGC-funded Institutions
The philosophical shift in undergraduate education internationally and locally towards student-centred, outcomes-based approaches requires a concomitant rethinking of assessment practices. Under outcomes-based approaches to student learning, UGC-funded institutions in Hong Kong are not only exploring diverse learning experiences for undergraduate students, but are also incorporating innovative and diverse forms of assessment.
In rethinking the forms of university assessments undertaken, institutions are also engaged in reviewing the means by which these are judged and performance is reported. Such a review includes not only the role of standards (criterion) based assessment vis-à-vis norm based assessment but also the honours classification system in a standards (criterion) based assessment environment. In this session, representatives from the UGC-funded institutions will speak on the philosophical and practical challenges of reforming assessment practices and will share suggestions for the path ahead.
| Chairperson: | Professor Michael T. Prosser Centre for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning, The University of Hong Kong |
| Standards Based Assessment | |
| Discussants: | Professor Carmel McNaught Centre for Learning Enhancement and Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong |
| Mr. James Rice Department of Philosophy, Lingnan University |
|
| Dr. C.S. Tong Academic Registrar, Hong Kong Baptist University |
|
| Professor Wang Wen Chung Assessment Research Centre, The Hong Kong Institute of Education |
|
| Honours Classification | |
| Discussants: | Dr. Catherine C.H. Chiu College of Humanities and Social Sciences, City University of Hong Kong |
| Professor Esmonde F. Corbet Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong |
|
| Professor Suleyman Demokan Vice President (Academic Development), The Hong Kong Polytechnic University |
|
| Dr. David Mole Associate Vice-President for Academic Affairs, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology |
|