From Traditional to Programmatic Assessment in Three (Not So) Easy Steps

Bibliographic Data

ID22046236
AuthorsAnna Ryan (0000-0001-7458-027X, The University of Melbourne, corresponding author), Terry Judd (0000-0002-4692-6701, The University of Melbourne)
Year2022
Volume12
Issue7
Pages487
Publication date2022-07-14
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEducation Sciences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2227-7102 • E-ISSN: 2227-7102
PublisherMDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT)
DOI10.3390/educsci12070487
OpenAlexW4285596447
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited25

Programmatic assessment (PA) has strong theoretical and pedagogical underpinnings, but its practical implementation brings a number of challenges—particularly in traditional university settings involving large cohort sizes. This paper presents a detailed case report of an in-progress programmatic assessment implementation involving a decade of assessment innovation occurring in three significant and transformative steps. The starting position and subsequent changes represented in each step are reflected against the framework of established principles and implementation themes of PA. This case report emphasises the importance of ongoing innovation and evaluative research, the advantage of a dedicated team with a cohesive plan, and the fundamental necessity of electronic data collection. It also highlights the challenge of traditional university cultures, the potential advantage of a major pandemic disruption, and the necessity for curriculum renewal to support significant assessment change. Our PA implementation began with a plan to improve the learning potential of individual assessments and over the subsequent decade expanded to encompass a cohesive and course wide assessment program involving meaningful aggregation of assessment data. In our context (large cohort sizes and university-wide assessment policy) regular progress review meetings and progress decisions based on aggregated qualitative and quantitative data (rather than assessment format) remain local challenges

Curriculum · Engineering ethics · Knowledge management · Management science · Pedagogy · Process management · Qualitative property · Transformative learning · Computer Science · Engineering · Engineering Education and Curriculum Development · Innovations in Medical Education · Psychology · Student Assessment and Feedback

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access