This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 29 October 2014, At: 21:19Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Law TeacherPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ralt20

Assessment to promote learningMichael Bennett aa Academic Development Leader, Law Faculty , Southampton InstitutePublished online: 09 Sep 2010.

To cite this article: Michael Bennett (2000) Assessment to promote learning, The Law Teacher, 34:2, 167-174, DOI:10.1080/03069400.2000.9993054

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03069400.2000.9993054

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

ASSESSMENT TO PROMOTE LEARNING

By MICHAEL BENNETT*

THIS ARTICLE will review the place of assessment in Higher Education. Ininvestigating alleged over-assessment in higher education, it is argued thatan excess of one form of assessment over another limits student learning.How this imbalance has a detrimental effect on learning is identified, beforesolutions for the individual lecturer and institutions are considered. Theauthor draws on existing literature, but also contributes his own experienceand his research in the UK and USA.

Importance of Assessment in the Learning Process

The power of assessment to influence student behaviour has perhaps neverbeen so obvious. In fact the assessment on a course may well have agreater influence on students than any teaching. Boud1 observes this powerwhen he says:

'Students can, with difficulty, escape from the effects of poor teaching, theycannot (by definition, if they want to graduate) escape the effects of poorassessment.'

In fact, where a teacher is perceived to be sub-standard by his students,this can lead to a flurry of study and possibly enhance learning. Butwhatever the standard of teaching, the assessment process will loom and bea powerful influence on the behaviour of students.

Students to a greater or lesser extent will take a strategic approach toassessment, looking at ways to enhance marks. The strategic approach maywell be used by certain students to secure a first class degree.2 But moreimportantly strategic learners3 include students keen to gain a lower classdegree, but who otherwise have little interest in learning.

Given its power to influence student behaviour, assessment should begeared to beneficial aims. In particular the assessment should promote theform of learning desired. Given this, it is important to consider what is theassessment practice in Higher Education and its intended purpose.

* Academic Development Leader, Law Faculty, Southampton Institute.1 Boud, D. (1995), Assessment for Learning in Higher Education, ed Knight P. (Kogan Page) p. 35.2 Arksey, H. (1992), How to Get a First Class Degree (Unit for Innovation in Higher Education),

pp. iv-v.3 Entwistle, N. and Ramsden, P (1983), Understanding Student Learning (Croom Helm).

167

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

1:19

29

Oct

ober

201

4

168 MICHAEL BENNETT

Purposes of Assessment

There are many reasons put forward for assessing. Brown and Knight4

identify the following 13:

1. Students expect it.2. Students are motivated by assessment.3. It can provide feedback.4. It can help students remedy mistakes.5. It helps with option choice and selection.6. It indicates readiness for progression.7. It can help diagnose faults.8. It provides a performance indicator for students.9. It enables grading and final degree classification.

10. It provides a performance indicator for staff.11. It provides a performance indicator of the course and the institution.12. We have always done it.13. Assessment is learning.

To a great extent these purposes are subsumed by the theories ofsummative and formative assessment. If the assessment is summative it ismeasuring the achievement of students. The judgement made about astudent is frequently in the form of a percentage or a grade. If theassessment is formative its prime purpose is to help the students improve.Formative assessment frequently involves oral or written feedback with aview to improving student learning.

Assessment is often both summative and formative. Thus an end of yearexamination would appear to be primarily summative, but a grade doesgive some feedback, however imprecise, on student performance. Anassignment set early in the course may well be providing both summativeand formative assessment. Thus it has the potential for useful feedback, butalso contributes to the overall marks for the course.

Increase in Assessment

From a lecturer point of view the increased marking load is one of the illeffects of the diminishing resources available to each student. Yet theincrease in student numbers is not alone in causing the increase. A lawdegree studied 25 years ago in the polytechnic sector would have typically13 formal assessments. This might involve 4 examinations for each of the3 years and a dissertation at the end of year 3. A law degree today at thesame institution typically would have many more formal assessments.There is likely to be an assignment and examination for each module.

4 Brown, S. and Knight, E (1994), Assessing Learners in Higher Education (Kogan Page), pp. 35-37.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

1:19

29

Oct

ober

201

4

ASSESSMENT TO PROMOTE LEARNING 169

Students typically study 3 modules a semester and thus might have 36formal assessments. The number of assessments might be further increasedif the student studies for half modules.

The increase in the number of formal assessments has been observed inlegal education5 and higher education generally,6 but it is important toappreciate this shows an increase in summative assessment. This increase inthe measurement of student performance is not accompanied by an increasein formative assessment. In fact the feedback, that students say they seek,7

and that is vital for the learning process, is diminishing.

Causes of Excessive Summative Assessment

A significant change in higher education since the 1960s is the developmentof course work. Heywood8 shows that this arose from concerns about thereliability of examination assessments. A student could be unwell duringthe examination period or suffer stress from the experience. Initially coursework was only used to moderate examination marks, but in time hasbecome part of formal assessment. It is now realised that continualassessment has widened the skills that can be assessed and these caninclude vocational skills. Thus a case study can demand not only researchand problem solving skills, but also group and presentational skills.Although providing the potential for formative assessment, thisdevelopment has increased significantly the number of summativeassessments.

A more recent change is the drive by higher education, particularly inthe new universities, towards semesters and modularisation.9 Theassessment rules will frequently require each module to be assessed withina semester, often involving 12 weeks of teaching. The typical full-timestudent will thus have several course work assignments to complete in the12 week period. Given the shortness of semesters, bunching of assignmentsat the end of the semester is a frequent problem. The assignments may bereturned just before or possibly after the examinations, so the potential forformative assessment is limited. But the demands of summative assessmentwill be met with marks from course work and examinations.

On some courses the increase in summative assessment has beenincreased by the particular design of the course. Often through a desire tosatisfy all subject groups, semesterisation has encouraged not only modules,

5 Harris, P. and Tribe, D. (1995), " T h e Impact of Semesterisation and Modularisation in theAssessment of Law Students", Law Teacher 29, pp. 279-294, p. 287.

6 Jackson, N. (1997), Managing flexible curricula in Higher Education: the Architecture of Modularity(Higher Education Quality Council), pp. 16-18. Brown S. and Saunders D. (1995). "The Challengeof Modularization", 32(2) Innovations in Education and Training International, pp. 96-105, 103.

7 King, K., Thomas T. and Adams, C. (1997), Business Undergraduate Perceptions of Assessment,unpublished research from London Guildhall University and Southampton Institute.

8 Heywood, J. (1994), Enterprise Learning and its Assessment in Higher Education, pp. 30-34.9 See supra note 5, pp. 279-294.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

1:19

29

Oct

ober

201

4

170 MICHAEL BENNETT

but half modules. These halves will be allocated 50% of the time, butfrequently require both course work and an examination for assessment,thus increasing the summative assessment.

Ill-effects of Dominance of Summative Assessment

An assessment system dominated by the needs of summative assessmentcan encourage mere surface learning. Entwistle and Ramsden10

distinguished between the surface learner and the deep learner. The surfaceleamer tends to be passive and unquestioning, and will memorise factswithout concern for understanding. The deep learner is very different inthat he attempts to make sense of the subjects he studies. Those taking adeep approach to learning have been shown to be more successful informal assessments.11 But the favoured semester system by concentrating alearning workload into a few weeks and placing on students the constantpressure of formal assessment, does not encourage the reflection needed fordeep learning.12

The student who is both a strategic and surface learner may wellsuccessfully complete his degree. The fact that his time as a studentproduced little learning is perhaps less important than the fact that hisexperience is that assessments are a mere chore. Thus negative attitudes tolearning are encouraged at a time when it is becoming universallyrecognised that undergraduate studies soon become out of date13 and thegoal should be to create independent learners.14

As already described the emphasis on summative assessment has beendetrimental to the level of formative assessment. This is a serious defect inthe teaching process already reeling under the pressure of increased studentnumbers. Students on being canvassed identified feedback as a key purposeof assessment.15 This finding needs further research given the experience ofmany lecturers, who are disappointed in the lack of interest in theircarefully worded comments on assignments as opposed to keen interest inthe mark awarded. This experience suggests strategic learners and thedominance of summative assessment.

To complete this rather depressing picture, one must comment on theeffect the current system has on lecturers. Given the lecturer has toconstantly assess his student to produce marks, the student perception ofthe lecturer is likely to be of an assessor rather than a teacher. Thischanging emphasis may in fact discourage the student from admitting

10 See supra note 3.11 Gibbs, G. (1992), Improving the Quality of Students—Learning Through Course Design, in

learning to Effect, SRHE and OU Press.12 See supra note 5.13 Sherr, A. (1997), "Legal Education, Legal Competence and Little Bo Peep", Law Teacher, 32, pp.

37-63, p. 5.14 Kennedy, H. The Learning Age, Green Paper 1998.15 See supra note 7.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

1:19

29

Oct

ober

201

4

ASSESSMENT TO PROMOTE LEARNING 171

difficulty with study and generally alienate the teacher from the student.The system also creates major workload problems on lecturers, who mightspend their time better on preparing classes and research into theirdiscipline.

Solutions for Lecturers

Given the tendency of students to gear their performance to gain maximummarks, higher education could increase formal assessments to motivatestudents into further learning. This approach was used at my owninstitution, where an LLB was created in 1991. To motivate students intopreparing seminars, their performance would be assessed. There werepractical problems in this assessment, which were magnified as studentnumbers rose. Lecturers were concerned that students refrained fromasking questions in case it highlighted gaps in their understanding. Bonedescribes this "minefield" drawing attention to such issues as whether allseminars are assessed, how to restrain a vociferous contributor andproblems of correct identification of students.16

Even if all the above problems can be solved, an approach thatencourages students to become strategic learners is not welcome. At timesthe behaviour of students is analogous to that of performing sea lions. Inthe same way that sea lions perform tricks to be rewarded by fish, studentswork to gain marks. Without fish the sea lions do not perform. Surely wedo not want students to merely study for marks. We need to encourage anatural love of learning and the potential for independent learning.

The preferred strategy would be to drastically reduce the amount offormal assessment on a degree. If those quality checking a law degree 25years ago only required 13 summative assessments, why are 36 suchassessments needed today? If students did not have to meet the constantdemands of formal assessment, they would have the opportunity to adopt adeeper approach to learning and time would be available for informalformative assessment.

The approach of decreasing formal assessment was put forward at aconference for staff at Southampton Institute and was well received.17 Theconference led to several projects which involve lecturers from variousdisciplines devising new assessment methods to enhance student learning.18

Thus, for example a group of lecturers want to move away from teachinghuman anatomy through formal lectures and examinations and create aninteractive computer program. The group wants students to be able to testthemselves in their own time and to repeatedly return to the program until

16 Bone, A. (1999), Ensuring Successful Assessment (National Centre for Legal Education), p. 32.17 Bennett, M. (1998), Issues in Assessment, paper at Assessment to Enhance Learning Conference,

Southampton Institute.18 Reported to Southampton Institute Conference for Academic Development 1999.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

1:19

29

Oct

ober

201

4

172 MICHAEL BENNETT

the knowledge and understanding has been achieved. Another group wantto review their postgraduate management courses and encourage self andpeer assessment. Yet another group is redesigning the assessment of acriminology module on the law degree to include a portfolio, facilitatingregular feedback and developing research skills. The potential for change isclearly there, although it is too early to report on any change in studentbehaviour.

Solutions for Departments and Institutions

Given the inclinations of students to give priority to gaining marks, thereclearly is a danger that students will concentrate their efforts on themodules with heavier assessment demands and ignore those with lighterassessment demands. Thus ideally the assessment strategy for an entirecourse needs to be reconsidered. Given modularisation this will meanreform at institutional level in many cases. Simply restricting the number offormal assessments to one for each module and encouraging assessments tocover more than one module, could bring about significant change.

When reconsidering the assessment strategy, a good opportunity presentsitself to review the validity of the assessment on the course. It is necessarythat you ask whether the assessments are really testing the learningoutcomes of the course. If the intended outcomes include skills inpresentation, information technology and group work the traditional 3 hourexamination will be inappropriate. Such skills are included in the proposedBenchmark Standards for a law degree19 and every institution will have todecide on what is appropriate evidence of achievement. The challenge forLaw Schools will be to demonstrate to the Academic Reviewers that theassessment methods really test these skills. In addition a record of skillsassessed may help the student in the job market.20

It is encouraging to see that assessment strategies and their reform arenow being discussed.21 Once the power of assessment is fully recognised,discussions on teaching and learning without reference to assessment willseen nonsensical. Bone proposes that course teams construct an assessmentmatrix.22 She explains:

"The idea of an assessment matrix is that you match the learning outcomes ofa course of study eg LLB or listed set of courses if several modules arecommon (law major or minor pathways in a combined degree) to the

19 Benchmark Standards for Law Degree in England, Wales and Northen Ireland: Working Draftfor Pilots (1998) (Quality Assessment Agency).

20 Dearing, R. (1997), Higher Education in Learning Society, 9.44-9.54 discusses certificates ofachievements as part of proposed progress files which will inform employers.

21 See Brown and Knight supra note 4, pp. 99-155; Moore, I. (1995), Assessment for Learning inHigher Education, ed. Knight, P. (Kogan Page), pp. 96-109; Heywood supra note 8, pp. 140-145.

22 Supra note 16, p. 18.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

1:19

29

Oct

ober

201

4

ASSESSMENT TO PROMOTE LEARNING 173

assessments to ensure that all learning outcomes are being assessed and thatstudents are exposed to a variety of assessment methods which enable them todemonstrate their learning in different ways.'

Taken with her earlier advice23 that subject content should only beconsidered once learning outcomes and assessment tasks have beenconsidered, this creates a systematic approach to ensure learning outcomesare met.

Semesters in the Dock

A review of assessment strategies will often lead to questions being askedabout the semester system, which usually requires summative assessmentduring and at the end of a short period (often 10-12 weeks) of learning.Research at my own institution showed that lecturers regarded semesters asa major impediment to improving the student experience.24 Over-assessment was a key issue, but the semester was also regarded as tooshort a period to allow the reflection required to absorb more complicatedsubjects. To law lecturers, the fact that students failed to understand theprinciples of land law after a 12 week teaching period, was no surprise.Semesters were introduced to serve the twin goals of accessibility andflexibility, it being pointed out that the USA and European countries withmass higher education systems used semesters. Research on the benefits ofsemesters is singularly lacking.25 This is remarkable given they have beenembraced by so many institutions proud of their research reputations.

Within the USA semesters have apparently not been evaluated againstother periods of learning.26 This is not surprising given semesters arealmost universally used throughout the US education system and thereforethere is little scope for comparative study. This also means that the systemis not new for the student arriving at a university. The shock of moving touniversity at 17 years of age for a 4 year degree is further lessened throughthe subjects on offer. In the USA there is a firm belief in general education,thus this will make up about a third of a typical degree and will dominatein the earlier semesters. Students thus have a wide choice from subjectsthey studied at school and other topics of particular interest. In additionlaw is only studied at postgraduate level. The US student experience must

23 Supra note 16, p. 17.24 Working Party Consultation Report on Teaching Year, 1999 Southampton Institute research.25 UK reports have concerned themselves with rearranging the year to accommodate semesters

and considering how staff and premises can be used during the summer break. See TheFlowers Report (1993) Review of the academic year—report of consultation with HEFCE,HEFCW, CVCP and DENT. Organisation of the Academic Year (1994)—joint consultation ofCVCP, DENI, SCOP, HEFCE, HEFCW

26 Searches of AskERIC and other data bases, personal enquiries of several researchers of highereducation and interviews conducted at the American Association of Higher Education,Washington DC in July 1999 have failed to locate research into the effectiveness of semesters.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

1:19

29

Oct

ober

201

4

174 MICHAEL BENNETT

compare favourably with that in the UK, where students often tackle forthe first time both a different discipline and a new compressed period oflearning. It is not surprising that several UK HE institutions are reviewingtheir semester systems. But any reform will be fraught with difficulty, if theplace of assessment is not understood.

Conclusion

The need for assessment reform is vital if we want to encourage deeplearning and life-long learners.27 It will only come about when institutionsfully understand the power of assessment and take steps to encourage thedesired student outcome. Formative assessment promotes learning, whereasa constant burden of summative assessment will not encourage theappropriate behaviour and will impede independent learning. Studentsneed to reflect on their studies, to make mistakes and ask questions.28 Theyneed feedback to improve their performance. If we get the assessment right,the learning will follow.

27 Assessment reform is also seen as the way forward to improve school standards. SeeAssessment Reform Groups (1999) Assessment for Learning (University of Cambridge School ofEducation).

28 How this reflection elevates the student to independent learning is central to recent researchon self-assessment. See Hinett, K. and Thomas, J. (1999), Staff Guide to Self and Peer Assessment(Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 2

1:19

29

Oct

ober

201

4