Bono de titulación

I then moved on to the second sub-section on the Range of Assessment Methods. This was intended to find out the formative assessment methods which were being used, the preferences and justification for doing so. The list of assessment methods included quizzes, tests, simulations, assignments, presentations, projects and term papers. Except for quizzes and tests the other methods are all varieties of assignments. I asked the focus groups to select one preferred method among those that were used to assess them and to justify their choice.

The key response in all the focus groups was that assignments were their preferred method of assessment. As for the reasons given for their preferences, one common issue emerged from all the four groups. All the focus groups were in unison that assignments gave more marks because they allowed them to collaborate, research and do well. In this regard a participant from FG1 had the following to say:

“Most of us prefer assignments because you get more marks. When we are given assignments and group presentations there is ample time to discuss and thereby correct one another. Even for individual assignments one can take it to a discussion for more ideas.”

In the same vein I asked the lecturers to give their preferences and reasons for the assessment methods being used. It was unanimous to all of them that assignments were the preferred

124

method of assessment. Several issues emerged with regards to the reasons for this preference. LEC1 had this to say:

“I prefer assignments because they open the minds of students. They facilitate for creativity and innovation in the students.”

One key issue was raised by LEC2 namely that assignments could be done in a more protracted manner. This is what the lecturer said:

“Assignments can be lengthy so that students can be able to present all the steps in a formal sequence such as the preparation of journals and accounts. This is more than in a quiz where only a small section is presented.”

According to LEC3 assignments were said to give opportunity for knowledge construction more than knowledge reproduction (see Chapter Three, Section 3.4). The lecturer said:

“Assignments in this course give students the chance to do field work. This allows them to apply their knowledge as they analyse and put facts together in a project.” There were two issues that were raised by LEC 4. These were that while assignments allowed students to research, class size was a big hindrance to giving more of these. This is how the lecturer put it:

“I prefer assignments primarily because students get to research and get more information. This enhances learning. However, the number of assignments is reduced when one has a big class because of challenges of marking.”

The reasons put forward by the lecturers give room for students to produce knowledge instead of just reproducing knowledge. The students in the focus groups however focused more on the immediate reward for doing assignments more than Self-Regulation, (see Chapter Three, Section 3.3 and 3.4).

The assertions by LEC4 in the response above are somewhat reflected in the third sub-section on the frequency and timing of the various assessment methods. It was clearly shown from the interviews that there were more quizzes than assignments given. Here are the responses to the frequency and timing of the quizzes, tests and assignments. Thus they also represent the views of the lecturers. The figures indicate the number of times in the semester that these were to be given group by group. Since the semester was still in progress, some of these were anticipated to be given later hence the ranges in some of the groups:

125

Table 5.1- Frequency and Timing of Quizzes, Tests and Assignments Focus

Group

Assignments Presentations Projects Quizzes Tests Mid- Semester Examination FG1 5 1 2 1 FG2 2-3 2 12-14 3 1 FG3 1-2 2 1-2 6-8 1 FG4 3 1-2 4-5 1

Source: Focus Group Interview Guide

Although assignments were the preferred method of assessment, more quizzes were given to students than assignments. If the quizzes and tests are to be lumped together while all the forms of assignments (research papers, book reviews, presentations, projects) are also put together, the assignments were still less in number. This in a way is indicative of what may be the reality on the ground. The reasons for this could be many and wide-ranging. The students have already indicated that assignments allowed them to collaborate and thus give them high marks or scores. The lecturers have also indicated the importance of assignments in inducing research skills in the students. Nevertheless, another set of responses from the lecturers in the sub-section on the range of assessment methods showed certain dispositions.

I asked the lecturers to give the justifications for each assessment method that they use. A set of similar and varied reasons emerged from the responses. There was one key issue that was raised by LEC1 namely ease of marking. Here is how LEC1 responded:

“I give quizzes and exercises simply because they are easy to mark. Sometimes I allow the students to swap papers to mark for each other.”

Coming on to LEC2 the common issues raised had to do with fulfilment of formalities more than realising self-regulated learning as is shown in the following words:

“I give quizzes for quick recall of facts while the tests help me to cover the topic content.”

There were two key issues that emerged from the responses by LEC3 and LEC4 namely performance and display of knowledge. LEC3 said:

126 Similarly, LEC4 raised the two key issues by saying:

“In the tests and quizzes there is a display of knowledge. The students show how much they remember.”

Here is displayed a conspicuous tendency to use quizzes as the main method for formative assessment solely for marks or scores at the expense of self-regulated learning (see Chapter Two, Section 2.6). Quizzes should also be used for self-regulated learning purposes by evoking deep learning skills in students (see Chapter Three, Section 3.6). The responses though have shown that the big issue for formative assessment was to award or to be awarded marks. Even though assignments were mentioned, they also may not have been fully utilised for learning purposes as has been indicated in Table 5.1.

There is a fourth sub-section which is found only in the Lecturers’ Interview Guide namely relevance of formative assessment. I asked the lecturers for their opinion on the effectiveness of the formative assessment process at Solusi University. One common issue emerged from the responses by all the lecturers. The effectiveness of formative assessment was mainly seen in its ability to keep students occupied with academic work whilst they got rewarded with marks or grades.