Assessment tasks serve multiple purposes in the teaching, learning and assessment continuum. While traditional assessments have been a hurdle, authentic assessments seek to harness the learning potential of assessment tasks. ‘Assessment, if well designed, also acts to build students’ capacity to make judgements beyond immediate tasks or learning outcomes’ (Bearman, et al., 2014, p. 6).
The SC Model presents predictable challenges in accommodating learning and assessment activities in a six-week timeframe. The assessments for DSGN1009 (Design thinking and communication) unit were designed not only as a tool to assess but also for students to learn the technical content and to demonstrate and achieve industry skills needed for employment.
This unit sits under the Bachelor of Education where students, after completion of the course, work directly with school students. While working on the assessments, students get an understanding of the process involved in creating a Computer Aided Design (CAD) model of their design and of what is possible and what could be challenging for the school students when they undertake a similar task.
Our students are likely to require to undertake learning tasks throughout their lives (Boud, 2000). The educational design approach used in designing this unit prepares students for this. Within this unit, students assumed the role of a designer who was tasked to contribute towards one of the three proposed United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDG): Affordable and clean energy; Climate action; and Life below water. The assessments were staged in smaller learning tasks chunks that formed part of the tutorial and workshop activities. Students worked on the series of tasks, the responses to which are unique based on the design they developed to work on for the chosen SDG. Students worked in groups during these sessions on specific tasks that contributed towards their individual assessments. This space provided them with a safe environment to receive constructive feedback to improve their work to reach the appropriate standard required for the completion of the task. By explicitly embracing a connectivist approach, this space also provided an opportunity for students to continually share and reflect as members of a Community of Inquiry (COI). The constructive feedback and the progressive assessment also remove any scope for contract cheating or academic integrity breaches (Bretag, et al., 2019). Student feedback from using this approach was very well-received with 4.6/5 satisfaction rate. We look forward to discussing the aspects of the unit that led to such high satisfaction rate.
?Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Boud, D., Hall, M., Bennett, S., Molloy, E., & Joughin, G. (2014). Guide to the Assessment Design Decisions Framework. Australian Government: Office for Learning and Teaching. http://www.assessmentdecisions.org/guide
Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable Assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/713695728
Bretag, T., Harper, R., Ellis, C., Haeringen, K. V., Newton, P., Rozenberg, P., & Saddiqui, S. (2019). Contract cheating and assessment design: exploring the connection. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Education and Training.