GCTLT: Assessing and Evaluating: What is your experience of moderation in your teaching context? – Discussion 3
for Ass 3
Before this year my experience has mainly been with post-
moderation. Firstly it has been an ‘internal’ process where my colleagues and I
will moderate each other’s work to look for consistency between our two sites
(Hamilton and Dunedin) and also to check our feedback comments in terms of
quality of statements. After this is completed the assessment committee also
provides feedback and then marks are released to students.
The other moderation I have had experience in is via an
external moderator who assesses the course based on set criteria involving,
assessments, student feedback, and a report that I write as course coordinator.
We have just debated this process as some staff felt it isn’t effective as the
majority of time the moderator ‘concurs’ with the course coordinator’s reports.
However, I have found the experience valuable in receiving confirmation for
issues that I’ve raised, (as it has meant that there was ‘backup’ to address
these in the following year), and also to sustain and grow areas that are
working well.
This year I developed a Rubric marking template which meant
I had to complete a pre-moderation process. This involved using previous year’s
scripts to test the new Rubric. A colleague and I blind marked 10% of old
scripts to test for consistency, and to check we complied with being fair and
transparent. The Rubric also went to the
assessment committee for approval which generated some general comments
including; clarifying some terms used in the template, and noting that if a
student doesn’t quite ‘fit’ in one box- you can ‘highlight’ comments across a
number of boxes to give more specific feedback (this was helpful advice when it
came to actual marking in Semester 2). IT was only after this had been ‘tested’
that it was released to students.
To support this we also developed a teaching strategy that
had a number of components to support this assignment. These included a face to
face workshop about the assessment and Rubric marking sheet. Students also had access to online material
they could refer to in their own time which included web-links, a word document
that outlined general comments from me in regard to the assignment, and an open
Moodle forum where they could post any questions or comments. Both myself and
my colleague from Hamilton posted comments on this forum. We also posted
reflective questions students could explore themselves in their own online
forums (such as via the students’ facebook page).
• Why is moderation
important?
Internal moderation is important for consistency within a
course (especially when you have multiple markers), to ensure consistency
between courses and to give assurance to students that their mark is ‘reliable’
as per OP’s assessment policy (2009). ACU National (2008) also identified these
aims in the moderation process: comparability of assessment; quality of
assessment; and adherence to academic
standards
Internal moderation can also help trouble shoot any issues
(ie if one marker is unsure then they can utilise other staff to give an
opinion and/or the assessment committee).
External moderation is also important to give consistency
across the programme. I have found this helpful for checking if assessments are at the correct year level across the
programme as a whole (ie we are not asking first years to complete an assessment task that should be at 3rd year level and vice versa).
Pre and post moderation are important processes to "verify that assessment design and assessor
judgements are valid, fair, consistent and reliable; meet approved learning
outcomes; and are appropriate to the learning environment". (Otago
Polytechnic Academic Policy: Moderation of Assessment, AP908.00, 2007, p 1.) .
• What are the
differences between pre and post-assessment moderation?
Pre assessment is a process we engage in where we check information/processes
in regard to new assessment strategies before
they are given to students. This ensures students only receive assessment strategies
which have been ‘trialled and tested’.
Post assessment happens during and after an assessment
occurs which I engage in regularly with my colleagues as detailed above.
I thought the comment in ACU National about the ‘spirit’ of
moderation was interesting…
·
“Moderation
of assessment by self-review, School processes and, where applicable, internal moderators
are integral to quality assessment practices each time a unit is offered.
·
Moderation
of assessment by an independent moderator/s at regular intervals provides
opportunities for independent feedback.
·
Moderation
will be most effective when conducted in a spirit of professional learning and
quality improvement.” (ACU National, 2008; 433)
References:
ACU National (2008). Principals for Moderation for
Assessments. Retrieved from: http://www.acu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/150934/Moderation_principles-final.pdf
Otago Polytechnic (2009) Otago Polytechnic Academic Policy:
Assessment. Retrieved from:
http://moodle.op.ac.nz/file.php/62/Policies/AP0900.04_Assessment.pdf