Chapter 6: Students’ experiences of the participative assessment process 6.1 Introduction
8. Assessment Tasks 1 Class Presentations
8.2 Assignment Background
8.2.2 Task Two
In the second part of this assignment you should draw on your original PLP, the theory and principles we have covered in class and your own additional research in developing a theoretically grounded personal leadership philosophy. You are free to approach this assignment in you own way, but may want to structure it as follows:
a. Introduce your philosophy by providing a broad overview of the most important issues that are discussed. Your introduction should provide a clear outline of both the content and the structure of your argument.
154 b. The main body of your philosophy
It’s likely you will want to break your philosophy into a number of sections with each of these addressing a particular aspect of leadership you believe is important. In doing so you should:
Think carefully about the section headings. These should give the reader a clear idea of what to expect.
Clearly explain the principle that you are arguing for and show how this principle can be supported by theory.
Point out where the theory you are working with contradicts other theories and show why you feel one is more appropriate than the other.
It’s often useful to conclude the section with a very brief summary and to show how this leads into the next section.
c. Your conclusion
You should conclude you PLP with brief summary of the most important arguments you have made in the body of your text. This is not the place to introduce fresh ideas, but you may want to include a salient quote that helps summarise your argument.
d. Your reference list
Remember that you should only include texts in your reference list that you have actually used in the text.
Tip: It’s extremely common for both our ideas and our plans to change as we write. It’s therefore often useful to return to your introduction when you have finished your assignment and to ask yourself the following questions:
(1.) Have I made the arguments I said I was going to make?
(2.) Have I structured my argument the way I said I was going to structure it?
If you answer no to either question consider carefully whether you need to do more work on the assignment itself or simply need to re-work the introduction.
Assessment of the task
The assessment approach adopted for this assignment is intended to enhance your learning by directly involving you in the assessment of your assignment. This strategy is in keeping with the need for future media leaders to develop the skills of self-assessment as early as possible and to equip you to make judgements about the quality of your own work once you have left the relative safety of the university. It is, however, an approach that few students will have encountered before and it has consequently been explained in some detail.
Conventional assessment approaches tend to follow a similar formula in which lecturers determine the learning outcomes for a course, develop the assessment criteria and prescribe particular assessment tasks to judge whether students have met the outcomes. Thereafter, students are expected to complete the tasks and to submit them to lecturers for assessment, which normally involves feedback and the assignment of a grade.
For an assignment of this nature, which involves a deeply personal engagement with theory as you develop your own leadership philosophy, it seems inappropriate for all of the major
155
decisions regarding the quality of your work to be made by someone else. If, as it is hoped, the PLP will be a living document that informs your practice for years to come then it seems natural that you should have a significant say in this process. However, it’s important to recognise that the SPI also has an interest in ensuring that graduates are able to meet the course outcomes and safeguards have been built into the process to ensure that overall standards are maintained.
For this assignment students will be directly involved in the process from the start. The lecturer has set the overall outcomes for the module, but the criteria and the way in which you approach the task is negotiable. You will also be directly involved in both the assessment of your own work and in determining what grade you should receive for the assignment. You will also be involved in the assessment of one of your colleague’s work and providing them with detailed feedback in terms of the assessment criteria negotiated for the course.
How the process works:
1. During Seminar One you will be paired with another student who will be your assessment partner (AP) for module.
2. In Seminar Two you will have a chance to work with your AP in giving each other formative feedback on Task One. It’s hoped you will not only learn from reading through what you partner has done, but that you will also be able to make substantive suggestions about how her/his work can be developed.
3. Having completed Task I you will work individually in completing Task II. You are welcome to consult with you partner if you have questions or want to bounce specific ideas. But your final assignment must be your own.
4. In Seminar Three we will work together on developing the assessment criteria for the assignment. This process will be explained in class.
5. The final grid will be consolidated on Monday, 17 March.
6. The deadline for Task II is 9am on Tuesday, 25 March. Assignments should be emailed to both the lecturer and to your AP.
7. You should then provide written feedback on your AP’s assignment, preferably using the track change function on MS Word to insert comments and questions. You should also prepare a feedback report in which you write comments for AP against each of the assessment criteria. Please bring a printout of your feedback to the next seminar.
8. You will meet your AP after class on Wednesday, 26/03 to provide each other with feedback and to explain your written comments. This is also a good time to ask questions. Expect to spend at least 45 minutes on each assignment.
9. Having completed this process you should write a 300 word evaluation of the process.
This should be sent to you AP and the course lecturer before 9am on Thursday, 27 March. In this evaluation you should discuss the following:
- How did you experience the process of both giving and receiving feedback?
- What did you feel where the most beneficial aspects of the feedback you received f rom your AP?
- How could you make the process more valuable if you were asked to do it again?
10. You will have the whole of Thursday free to conduct a self-assessment of your assignment drawing on the assessment criteria and on the feedback made by your assessment partner. In completing your assessment your should do the following:
- Study the criteria and consider carefully what grade you feel your work deserves against each category. Remember you are assessing work you have produced, not the amount of effort you put into the task or what you intended to do. Try to place yourself in the shoes of a reader seeing your work for the first time.
156
- Assign yourself a grade against each criterion and then write a detailed explanation of why you have chosen that grade. Be fair on yourself. If your work could be improved then use this as a chance to learn. If you do feel you have produced good work that meets the criteria do not be afraid to recognise your achievement.
11. Your final assessment report should be submitted to the lecturer by 9am on Friday, 28 March. This should be emailed. A hard copy of your assignment and your assessment report must be submitted at the start of class on Friday.
12. You will get detailed feedback from the lecturer on your assignment by the end of the second week of Term Two. This feedback will include comments on your PLP and comments on your assessment of your own work.
13. To ensure that the SPI’s standards are maintained the lecturer will also grade your assignment. This will include consideration of the degree to which you have been able to explain why you have awarded yourself a particular mark.
14. Where the difference between the marks awarded by the student and the marks awarded by the lecturer is less than XX26 the student’s mark will stand.
15. Where the difference exceeds XX the lecturer and the student will meet to discuss the grade and seek agreement on a common mark. An external examiner will be invited to review the assessment if the student and lecturer fail to agree.
26 To be agreed on in class.
157 Week One
Semin ar
Date Topic Preparation and tasks
1
Monday 10 March 09.00 – 12.30
Explanation of course outcomes, requirements, and assessment strategies.
- Lessons from Jenga
Read the following for Session Two:
The structure of media organisations (G1) Qualities of Leadership and Management (G2)
- Develop a personal leadership
philosophy for presentation in Session 2 (Task One).
2
Tuesday 11 March 09.30 – 11.00
Feedback meeting in the Botanical Gardens and
alternative will be agreed on if it is raining.
3
Wed.
14 March 09.00 – 12.30
Development of management paradigms, management roles and the relationship between leadership and power.
- Present leadership philosophies
Read the following for Session Three:
Newsroom Management Roles (G3) Leadership and Power (G4).
158 4
Friday 16 March 09.00 – 12.30
Understanding the difference between management and leadership
- Qualities of leaders interactive exercise
Read the following for Session Four:
Styles of Management (G1)
Communication in Newsrooms (G2) Week Two
Session Date Topic Tasks
5
Monday 17 March 09.00 – 12.30
Motivating staff
- Problem solving exercise
Read the following for Session Five:
Feedback: Newsroom employees want it, managers avoid it (G3)
Motivating journalists (G4)
6
Tuesday 18 March 09.00 – 12.30
Motivating staff and providing constructive feedback
- Practical application of lessons from feedback readings.
Read the following for Session Six:
Managing newsroom employees – A guide to solving personal problems (G1)
Managing newsroom employees II (G2) Caught in the middle (G3)
Inside newsroom teams (G4)
7
Thursda y 20 March 09.00 – 12.30
Dealing with common
leadership problems in media organisations
For Session Seven:
Complete readings that may be provided for the next session.
Week Three
Session Date Topic Presenter
8
Tuesday 25 March 09.00 – 12.30
Managing Conflict Dr Noel Pearse
9
Wednes day 27 March 09.00 – 12.30
Managing Change Trevor Amos
10
Friday 28 March 09.00 – 12.00
Pulling it all together and course evaluation
159
Appendix Four: Focus Group Interview Schedule
Focus Group Interview Schedule [75/75]
Introduction of the process and the main facilitator. Review of the approach.
1. Broad opening question posed in a round-robin format. [10/60]
What, for you, have been the most interesting aspects of the process?
2. How has the process impacted on students learning? [10/50]
Involvement of students in setting own criteria for the assignment Understanding of criteria
Degree to which students considered criteria when approaching the assignments – backwash.
3. Understanding of the assessment process [10/40]
Difficulty of applying criteria to complex tasks Subjective nature of assessment
Have student got a sense of what happens in the mind of an assessor when evaluating work Degree to which the process was authentic for students – did they see themselves as assessors?
4. Experience of giving feedback to and receiving feedback from peers [15/35]
What were the main benefits of this process?
Were there any challenges?
What did you learn from assessing the work of a peer?
What did you learn from giving feedback to a peer?
Did this process help students when it came to their own self-assessment
What have learned from the process that will assist them in their future learning and future professional development?
5. Experience the self-assessment process [15/20]
Did students feel that it contributed to their learning? In what ways?
What were the main challenges?
How do they make the links between what they were expected to do in the classroom and their future professional development?
6. Comparing self-assessments with the lecturer’s assessment? [10/20]
Benefits Challenges
Attention to feedback
Learning from differences in assessment
7. How did the process impact on power relations in the classroom [10/10]
8. Other issues you’d like to raise in the lecturer’s absence [10/10]