Susan Orr

Assessment moderation: constructing the marks and constructing the students

In this paper the author considers the positivist approaches in mainstream higher education assessment research. She contrasts this to emerging poststructuralist perspectives and goes on to report on a study into the assessment moderation practices in a higher education art department. In this research she explores the ways in which art and design lecturers talk about students’ grades in moderation meetings and reports on the different ways that groups of lecturers co‐construct meaning in relation to the practice of agreeing marks.

Mark my words: the role of assessment criteria in UK higher education grading practices

This article seeks to illuminate the gap between UK policy and practice in relation to the use of criteria for allocating grades. It critiques criterion-referenced grading from three perspectives. Twelve lecturers from two universities were asked to ‘think aloud’ as they graded two written assignments. The study found that assessors made holistic rather than analytical judgements. A high proportion of the tutors did not make use of written criteria in their marking and, where they were used, it was largely a post hoc process in refining, checking or justifying a holistic decision. Norm referencing was also found to be an important part of the grading process despite published criteria. The authors develop the notion of tutors’ standards frameworks, influenced by students’ work, and providing the interpretive lens used to decide grades. The implications for standards, and for students, of presenting the grading process as analytical and objective are discussed.

Collaborating or fighting for the marks? Students’ experiences of group work assessment in the creative arts

The study explores students’ and lecturers’ experiences of group work assessment in a performing arts department that includes undergraduate studies in theatre, dance and film. Working from the perspective that assessment is a socially situated practice informed by, and mediated through, the socio‐political context within which it occurs, this research takes the form of an inquiry that employs qualitative approaches to data collection using interviews and focus groups. The aim of the study was to elicit students’ and lecturers’ views concerning the assessment of process (also known as contribution), conceptions of fairness and the management of free‐loading students. The tensions that reside in group work projects where students are marked for process as well as product are explored. The analysis shows that students navigate complex trajectories where they collaborate and fight for their marks. Reflective journals are often used as a tool to assess process in group work projects. This analysis challenges the popular view that reflective journals offer an unproblematic representation of process. Whilst this study is situated within the performing arts, the findings are relevant to any group work project where lecturers seek to design assessment approaches that disentangle group and individual contribution.

Making judgements about students making work: Lecturers' assessment practices in art and design

This research study explores the assessment practices in two higher education art and design departments. The key aim of this research was to explore art and design studio assessment practices as lived and experienced by art and design lecturers. This work draws on two bodies of pre-existing research. Firstly this study adopted methodological approaches that have been employed to good effect to explore assessment in text based subjects (think aloud) and moderation mark agreement (observation). Secondly the study builds on existing research into the assessment of creative practice. By applying thinking aloud methodologies in a creative practice assessment context the authors seek to illuminate the ‘in practice’, rather than espoused, assessment approaches adopted. The analysis suggests that lecturers in the study employed three macro conceptions of quality to support the judgement process, namely the demonstration of significant learning over time, the demonstration of effective studentship and the presentation of meaningful art/design work.

Joined Up Policy: A Strategic Approach to Improving Retention in the UK Context.

This article outlines the development of interest in retention studies in Britain arising from a concern about the appropriate use of public money. It then describes the strategies being used to improve retention within the London Institute, a federation of five art and design focused colleges. Strategies described include study support, tutorial and professional development, including awareness raising, with academic staff. Many of these strategies have been developed in recent years in FE (community) colleges in Britain but our particular concern is to develop an overarching and interlinking strategy across a whole college rather than individual or sectional initiatives. This is what the British New Labour government calls “joined up policy.”