Assessment

Assessment

My assessment structure and practices are aligned with the learning outcomes that are stated in the Yearbook and the Course outlines. I also match them with the UWC graduate attributes (GAs), of which, I believe, the most important is Lifelong Learning (tier 1), which I am actively practicing myself. Expectations from each assessment are explained to the students in advance (shape of the project, deadline, point allocation, overall contribution to the continuous assessment mark, possible ways to earn bonus points), and examples are provided for the lower-level students.

Each assessment should be focused on one or more than one learning outcomes. By introducing assessments that require certain skills and knowledge, I motivate students to seek relevant knowledge and practice their skills. Most of my assessments are case-based tasks, such as: solving a three-point problem from a geological/topography map, completing the geological map using the partial provided information, and produce the cross-section along the given line, calculating the dip angles of inclined strata, measuring the attitude of a plane with the compass (Fig. 8), plot the results of the strike and dip on the stereonet, read a stereonet, interpret the structure in a field image, etc. These assessments focus on more complex, higher levels of learning activity, such as interpreting, practicing, producing, understanding, creating, etc., and cannot be completed by merely memorizing the theoretical concepts (although the latter is also very important as a basis). According to Bloom’s taxonomy, these kinds of complex activities correspond to higher levels of cognitive functions. Still, they should be based on a solid foundation of lower-level activities such as knowledge of the discipline (Bloom and Krathwohl, 1956).  

For the course APG231, I also design theory-based tests such as multiple answer/multiple choice questions, fill-the-gap questions, and short essay questions. Students usually enjoy these types of tests more and manage them easier because their memorization skills are good. However, I prefer to involve higher-order thinking that is not only focused on memorization but also on understanding and application of knowledge (Bloom and Krathwohl, 1956). A large part of being a geologist is to observe the rocks around you and make sense of them (“pattern recognition”). In addition, I often assign group projects because working in groups was shown to increase motivation (e.g., Petcovic et al., 2020; James et al., 2021), and peer-learning is, in general, a good instrument that develops UWC graduate attributes, first-tier (“Creative and collaborative problem solving”) and second-tier (“Interpersonal flexibility and valuing difference”).

For senior students (APG322, APG721), I assign mini-projects such as, for example, (1) describing a hand sample of rock and making conclusions about this rock’s geological history, (2) studying a structural geology method and writing a short essay with an explanation, etc. In other words, the assessments are aiming at integrating academic literacies and address the student’s needs outlined here as well enhance the development of UWC GAs. I ask students to submit their works to iKamva and leave detailed feedback for them, following the UWC assessment policy (Section 4.16: Constructive Feedback). The project is usually done in two stages: students submit the first draft, which I evaluate, give them a mark, and provide detailed personalized feedback. I normally also give generalized feedback at a contact session and outline the common mistakes and the way forward. Further, students should take my comments into consideration and submit the final project. An example of such a project with detailed feedback can be seen here (student’s name removed). These activities are designed in accordance with the desired learning outcomes, for example: “To recognize the geological processes on a range of scales and to appreciate the close relationships between the outcrop-scale features and large-scale lithosphere dynamics” (APG322).

In the field, students are evaluated at multiple levels, individually and in groups (Fig. 16). The mark for the field report is composed of several components with different weights (Table 2). Students are made aware of the assessment scheme from the onset of the field trip and are closely monitored on their day-to-day progress by two supervising lecturers and student assistants (usually MSc and Ph.D. students).

I prefer to design final assessments as sit-down exams, if possible, where the students have to apply both theory and practical skills to problem-based questions. Usually, 90 to 120 minutes are allocated to write the exam. The exam equals 40% of the final mark for the module. Examples of the exam papers can be found here: APG231, APG322, and APG721.