Preparation of Assessed Work

Assessment Strategy

The programme requires participants to draw on and interrogate their experience through a process of critical reflection rather than submitting academic essays. Hence their work as teachers and as a learner constitute of significant part of the programme alongside the educational literature; we ask that they create a dialogue between that experience and the literature.

Secondly, we ask them to re-visit and reflect critically upon what happens in their teaching through the testing of their assumptions and their approach through selected parts of the literature. In this sense the programme asks them to apply their knowledge and critical abilities in the workplace and to reflect upon these processes in their assignments. To do this, they should situate themselves in processes/situations they are reflecting upon, rather than 'looking in' from the outside.

We seek to encourage participants to regard the programme as a process with which to engage rather than as a qualification to be acquired. Each of the modules is assessed independently via a reflective paper. In addition, within module 1 (Effective Learning & Teaching), participants are required to undertake a peer review of their teaching, which will be assessed formatively. They do not have to 'pass' the teaching observation.

Your Submission

You will present your work for each of the modules in the form of as described on each of the module outlines.

There are a number of ways in which this programme may be different from others that you have undertaken, particularly around assessment. Firstly, it is a qualification that draws heavily on your experience. Your work as a teacher and experience as a learner constitute a significant part of the programme alongside the educational literature; we ask that you create a dialogue between that experience and the literature.

Secondly, we ask that you re-visit and reflect critically upon what happens in your teaching through the testing of your assumptions and your approach through selected parts of the literature. In this sense the programme asks you to apply your knowledge and critical abilities in the workplace and to reflect upon these processes in your assignments. To do this, you should situate yourself in processes/situations you are reflecting upon, rather than ‘looking in’ from the outside.

Thirdly, we expect a high degree of adherence to academic conventions as they pertain to the study of education with a critical stance being adopted to both the research evidence and your own practice.

Finally, we ask you to advance your own practice as a teacher having gained new insights from the programme – in a process of critical and reflective engagement. We say more about the assignments in the next section but we hope you regard the programme as a process with which to engage rather than as a qualification to be acquired.

Each of the modules is assessed independently via a reflective paper. In addition, module 2 requires you to undertake a peer review of your teaching, which will be assessed formatively and also provide a signed testimonial of an observed teaching session (summative assessment). You do not have to ‘pass’ the teaching observation but you must undertake it and reflect upon it.

More generally, reflective papers are an established way of capturing the development of professional expertise. They are essentially a collection of experiences, reflection and, where appropriate, evidences, woven around an extended single narrative. They allow for choice in what is included whilst at the same time affording the opportunity to demonstrate that the learning outcomes for each module have been met. The assessment criteria, which we will describe later, will guide you in terms of how well you have engaged with each of those learning outcomes. As we stated earlier, we ask that you stay with academic conventions such as a clear structure, paragraphing and good reflective writing.

The difference between this and an academic essay is that the content and focus is driven by your experience and not by a specific title or literature. We say more about these differences in the writing guide on Blackboard.

Building Your Submission

We referred earlier to the way writing a critical reflection would be different to a traditional academic ‘essay’. Whilst participants in the Postgraduate Certificate programme often refer to their assignments as essays, you are not being asked to construct a series of arguments based on your understanding of the literature. You are being asked to ‘make’ a reflective narrative that sits somewhere between an essay and your story (a narrative) as a teacher. Such a work is likely to have reflective and academic elements in it which hopefully become more integrated as you rehearse the skill of reflective writing. We say more in the ‘writing guide’ in Blackboard about the writing process itself.

Constructing your submission will have no clear starting point, unlike an academic essay, which would probably require extensive reading/note-taking. Our recommended starting point would be to think about a recent teaching session and start to ‘re-think’ it, perhaps in terms of skills used or the feedback you received. You might have chosen that session for a reason (went well/not so well) and you want to know ‘why’ this might be the case. You might then turn to the literature (on say running small groups or one to one teaching) to look at whether your experience is similar to the research findings in your context.

This is the beginning of a ‘dialogue’ between your experience and the literature. You might then re-visit the same experience and begin to think about it more theoretically so using the traditions of cogitivism/constructivism/experiential learning to pick apart what happened. You might then consider (in module 1) Kugel’s paper on how professors develop as teachers to get a rough fix using his stages on your current conception of what teaching is.

This will help you to re-think your teaching but in a different way. A final early reference might be thinking about reflection itself. You have already done a great deal of reflecting but here we ask you to write your reflections and to do so ‘critically’. This could take you around Kolb’s learning cycle or to Brookfield’s ‘Four lenses’ model. Brookfield also urges us to hunt for assumptions, those taken for granted things we all carry around. An example of an assumption are that all learners enjoy working in small groups or that all of the content of a syllabus must be ‘covered’ by a teacher.

Observe Academic Conventions

Your portfolio should display the following characteristics:

• Acronyms – should be fully explained – as should technical terms which lie outside common usage

• Coversheet - Each submission must be submitted with the coversheet

• Contents Page - Each submission must include a contents page

• Font Size – 12

• Introduction - Each submission should include an introduction

• Layout - Each portfolio should be, well presented using appropriate paragraphs, sections and sub-sections.

• Line Spacing – 1.5

• Page Numbers – should be used on all pages

• Plagiarism - is a serious academic misdemeanour (see section below on unfair means)

• Proof Reading – your submission should be substantially free of errors. It is not acceptable to submit work with typographical and grammatical errors throughout

• Registration Number – This must be used to identify your submissions

• References - Use either the Harvard or Vancouver system. These are NOT included in the word count.

• Word Length – Adhere to the word length described in each of the Module Outlines – your bibliography is not included in the word count.

Word Count

The word count of an assessment is the number of words you use to complete that assessment. Unless you are specifically told otherwise, your word count does not include your title, contents page, bibliography and appendices.

Penalties

Your word count will be checked by Turnitin when you submit. Your word count has a tolerance of +/- 10%. If your work falls outside of this allowance your work will not be marked, it will be referred and you will be asked to resubmit.

Assessment Criteria

Your submissions will be judged on whether they meet the Learning Outcome for each module, reach the overall standard required for Postgraduate level work. These are set out within each module description. The course team endeavour to give prompt and useful feedback based on the criteria set out later in this section. However, it is not unusual for assessors to have differences of view about a proposed grade and/or the feedback given. We see this as inevitable with the discursive and individual submissions of the kind encouraged on this course. We try to minimise these differences through robust processes of moderation and recourse, where appropriate, to third markers and the External Examiner. If you have significant concerns about the above you should raise these with the Course Director.

We strongly encourage you to engage with the assessment criteria. However, these are indicative and it is only in the drafting process that you will get a clearer feel for the standards you are achieving. Your work will be graded as PASS, REFER or FAIL at final submission stage.

Fail grades are given generally after two referrals. A piece of work may also fail if one or more referrals have been earned by non-submission without an extension or extenuating circumstances. We do not provide grades above pass level though we do try to distinguish between ‘bare’ and ‘clear’ passes in the criteria to help you to develop your work.

Referencing your Work

Harvard

uses the author surname and year of publication (Smith, 2005) in the citation in the text and then an alphabetical list of the references (organised by first author surname) at the end of the assignment. The University of Sheffield Harvard referencing guide has a focus on citing printed material, however there is an additional guide for citing online and audio visual sources of information.

The University of Sheffield Library tutorial on Harvard referencing.

Vancouver

referencing system uses sequential numbers in the main text either as superscripts¹, or in brackets (2). The reference list at the end is organised in order of the appearance of the reference in the student work, starting with 1 and continuing sequentially.

The University of Sheffield Library tutorial on Vancouver referencing.

Choose one of the above referencing systems and stick to it, do not mix the two together.

Group Work Referencing

For an in-text citation of a colleague's contribution to a discussion, you can cite your reference as follows:

Khan (2019) discusses the use of constructivism in small group settings and suggests that it is important to establish 'ground rules' at the outset.

In the bibliography/reference list

Username or Surname of creator, initial(s)., Year. Title of message. In: Title of host message system (required if applicable) [medium designation]. Date message was posted [Date message viewed]. Available from: URL Path: (if needed).

Khan, S, 2019. Discussion of peer-teaching session. In: Blackboard Forums [online]. 7 November [Viewed 8 November 2019]. Available from: University of Sheffield Course: MDE61001 Effective Learning and Teaching (AUTUMN 2019~20)

What is unfair means?

In short, unfair means refers to cheating. It involves any attempt by a student to:

• gain unfair advantage over another student in the completion of an assessment or exam; or

• assist someone else in gaining an unfair advantage

Types of unfair means

Plagiarism - When you accidentally or knowingly submit someone else’s work or ideas as your own - e.g. the work of an expert, lecturer, or fellow/former student - without making it clear that it is not your own work. You can also self-plagiarise if you submit your own previously assessed work as part of a new assignment, without proper acknowledgement.

Essay buying - When you buy or commission part of or a whole piece of work from another student or an essay-writing website (essay “mill” or “bank”) and submit it as your own. This is an extremely serious form of plagiarism.

Collusion - When you work with someone else, or a group of others, on a piece of assessed work that you are supposed to be completing by yourself.

Fabrication - When you submit made-up information e.g. quotes, lab results, or survey findings that are untrue.

What happens when the Use of Unfair Means is detected

The University will commence procedures to investigate and, where appropriate, take action in response to the Use of Unfair Means. See: Guidance for Students Where Concerns are Raised About Their Use of Unfair Means.

How you can prevent it

Referencing is a key skill that can help you to prevent the use of unfair means. Whenever you take notes, you should note down referencing details at the same time, otherwise you may find it difficult to credit other scholars properly in assessed work later on.

Whether you're a home or an international student, you can book a one-to-one session with the English Language Teaching Centre (ELTC) to help with your writing, including referencing skills.

• ELTC Writing Advisory Service

The Library also offers information on plagiarism and tutorials on how to adhere to University referencing standards.

• Library: Referencing and plagiarism

Please watch the video below for the key do’s and don’ts from the University’s Examination Regulations.

Consequences

If we find you using unfair means, you will face action by your academic department or formal disciplinary action.

You can find the Regulations Relating to the Discipline of Students in the University Calendar.

How we detect it

We use a range of strategies to detect unfair means, including Turnitin, which helps detect plagiarism.

• Turnitin and plagiarism

You're required to declare that all work submitted is entirely your own. Your department may require you to attach a declaration form to work that you submit.

How to appeal

If you wish to appeal against an unfair means decision taken by your academic department, please follow our Academic Appeals process.

If you wish to appeal against an unfair means decision resulting from a discipline hearing, please follow our Discipline Appeals process.

• Complaints and appeals

See also

• Information on copyright

• General Regulations relating to Examinations (includes advice to students about the use of unfair means)