During Phase Two, coordinators and directors of teacher education were requested to provide information on the assessment policy and practice within their initial teacher education qualifications. The twenty-five providers who participated in Phase Two each provided some information on their assessment policy and practice. The data provided within this section is typically institutional policy and associated practice. In light of this, the report below is brief and does not discriminate among institutions or specific qualifications, although examples from different providers are used to illustrate common and distinctive features under each of the data-base fields.
ASSESSMENT POLICY
Most providers have institution-wide policies with respect to assessment, which provide statements on the philosophy and/or principles underpinning the assessment policy and practice. Such statements often include details of the levels and types of assessment governed by policy. Typically these policies are primarily concerned with assessment of student learning being fair and valid.
Assessment of student performance at the University of Otago follows four principles:
1. The formative (learning) functions of assessment will be given at least as much emphasis as the summative (grading and selection) functions.
2. Both formative and summative assessments will centre on knowledge, skills and attitudes which really matter.
3. The number, timing, and percentage weights of individual assessments will be chosen to maximise validity (both formative and summative).
4. The workload associated with assessment requirements will be reasonable, and the tasks will be fully described early enough to give students time to fit them in alongside their other commitments (University of Otago).
Typically, as demonstrated above and below, the policy is grounded in a set of principles or assumptions about the purposes of assessment and the principles upon which assessment of student learning is to be conducted.
Assessment should:
• be an integral part of the learning process
• enhance and promote student learning through formative assessment • motivate students to develop their skills and abilities
• encourage students to develop skills of reflection, self and peer assessment • encourage co-operative as well as individual learning
• be valid in that it is congruent with the learning outcomes • be reliable in that it is based upon stable information • be manageable in terms of student and lecturer workload
• involve negotiation of assessment criteria for self directed projects (Eastern Institute of Technology).
Most institutions provide details of the formal procedures followed and the departmental and institutional committees responsible for monitoring appropriate assessment procedures. Auckland University of Technology’s statement is typical of many of the larger providers. Smaller providers presented similar arrangements, but understandably the procedures do not involve multiple layers of committees.
124
The School of Education Te Kura Mātauranga Examination Board is responsible to the Board of Studies for the implementation of the programme assessment policy and practices in relation to individual students and to the Faculty Board for ensuring the fair treatment of students in the award of grades and credit. Terms of Reference are prescribed by the General Academic Statute (AUT 2004 Calendar, pp.63). The Board meets at least twice a year to approve final results. Membership includes the Head of School and Programme Leaders and Coordinators from each sector. Academic staff with responsibility for individual papers who are not members of the Exam Board may be invited to attend meetings to present final results.
The Examination Board is Responsible to Faculty Board for:
• fair treatment of students in granting credit and recognition of prior learning. • monitoring and the maintenance of pass and grade standards in granting credit. • approving the lists of passes and grades.
• fair treatment of students in granting of a special pass. • recommending the granting of qualifications.
• fair treatment of students in the approval of concurrent study.
• fair treatment of students in the approval of a variance to the maximum period of enrolment.
• fair treatment of students in the granting of leave of absence from a programme. AUT policy ensures there are procedures in place for the reconsideration of assessment, student appeals against final grades and misconduct or breach of rules relating to assessment (Auckland University of Technology).
Many of the providers include in their policy a commitment to students being able to submit work for assessment in either English or Māori.
POLICY FOR USE OF MĀORI IN ASSESSMENTS: Use of particular languages for assessment
(1) Unless specified otherwise in the relevant paper outline, students must submit assessment in either English or Māori.
(2) The presentation of assessment in Māori is subject to the Policy on the Use of Māori for Assessment (University of Waikato).
PRACTICE
The data provided for assessment practice are variable across institutions. Some institutions identify the broad approach to assessment such as a commitment to standards-based, competency-based practices.
Standards based methods of assessment shall be used. Assessments may be achievement based or competency based as specified in the programme documentation (Auckland University of Technology).
Eastern Institute of Technology and Te Wānanga o Aotearoa have distinct grading practices with respect to their initial teacher education qualifications. Eastern Institute of Technology has a grading category for their competency-based assessment, “not yet competent”, to denote students who have failed to meet the competency level required. Te Wānanga o Aotearoa does not award number grades (A, B, C etc.) to their first and second year students. Their assessment practice is grounded in the belief that all students can succeed. Students
who fail to meet the competency requirements are awarded the category “Competency Yet To Achieve” and provided with support to assist them to improve to the required standard.
All assessment in the Te Korowai Akonga is graded as High Competency Achieved, Competency Achieved, or Competency Yet To Achieve. High Competency Achieved has been added to Te Korowai Akonga to give indication of exceptional achievement for reasons of indicating excellence to future employing schools. The category Competency Yet To Achieve, signals that while the tauira may not have yet reached the required standard, he or she, with the support of the kaiako, will have the ongoing opportunity to meet these requirements. There is a presumption of success that will contribute to the enhancement of the tauira self esteem and sense of achievement (Cherrington, 1999). Tauira are in this way encouraged to continue to strive for excellence and mastery across all their courses. All tauira must attain an Achieved grade in all of the courses by the end of Year Three (including 271 credits at Levels 5 & 6 and 89 credits at Level 7) to be able to be considered for Graduation (Te Wānanga o Aotearoa).