Origen de las islas y de los hexágonos en las películas de GaN/Al 2 O 3

Apart from personal professional factors such as assessment literacy and teaching beliefs, environmental factors also influence how teachers design and implement assessment (Bearman et al., 2017). Environmental factors include resources, institutional and/or departmental regulations/policies and cultures (Bearman et al., 2017; Joughin, Dawson, & Boud, 2017). They inevitably play a role in shaping how teachers set their work priorities when

time is so precious. This subsection discusses how these factors contribute to issues of current assessment practice.

Sufficient resources entail various dimensions such as available time and support. It is obviously crucial to have ample resources for any change to occur. This is especially true for changing assessment practice because teachers do not seem to possess adequate assessment literacy to begin with. It is therefore reasonable to assume that teachers need an abundant amount of time and training to improve their assessment knowledge. In fact, faculties perceive changing assessment practice as time-consuming and as an

increase in their workload (Bahous & Nabhani, 2015). Increased workload has also been found to decrease a faculty’s participation and satisfaction in good assessment practice (McCullough & Jones, 2015). Workload and lack of time are interlinking factors governing assessment change.

Adequate training is another essential factor to drive change, especially for teachers with insufficient assessment literacy. Although training and

support seem to be happening and helping (Deneen & Boud, 2014; Sayigh, 2006), time as well as effective communication strategies allocated for such training may be suboptimal (Ebersole, 2009). There is insufficient time for repetitive good assessment practice, which limits engagement for practice change (Ebersole, 2009). Lack of time still seems to be an issue in situations where training is provided.

Other factors that directly affect the amount of time spent on

and cultures (Joughin et al., 2017). Chapter 4 of this thesis discusses in detail the current assessment policy picture in higher education; therefore, this topic is not reviewed in-depth here. In brief, policies and regulations have a

powerful influence on teachers’ choice of work priorities.

The heavy workload of academics partially explains the lack of time. How a faculty prioritises work also matters. Contemporary higher education ranking mechanisms put a heavy focus on research as compared to teaching. Also, faculty appraisal systems value research output rather than good

teaching (Raaper, 2016). This translates to the phenomenon that research activities are prioritised over teaching, especially when the workload is heavy (Bahous & Nabhani, 2015; Macdonald & Joughin, 2009; Tagg, 2012). A faculty often sees no incentives to spend time on teaching improvement, let alone on assessment change which is only one area of teaching (Norton et al., 2013).

In addition, changing conventional assessment practice is perceived as a high stakes process (Deneen & Boud, 2014) and such change may not be welcomed by students (Norton et al., 2013). As a result, a faculty may choose to invest their precious time on research-related tasks that are less risky and more beneficial to their career advancement.

With appropriate incentives and recognition coming from policies and regulations, assessment change can be promoted. Macdonald and Joughin (2009) state that recognition of good assessment practice has a strong influence on improving assessment change. However, a faculty might feel

there is little recognition in the existing system (Raaper, 2016). There is a place for embedding recognitions in policies or guidelines to encourage good assessment practice, and this recognition should apply to teachers in all academic tracks and should consider differences in organisational cultures (McCullough & Jones, 2015; Norton et al., 2013).

Apart from black-and-white regulations and policies, organisational culture exerts a powerful influence on assessment practice and change (Bearman et al., 2017; Macdonald & Joughin, 2009). Organisational culture encompasses implicit and explicit “ways of doing things” at departmental or disciplinary and institutional levels (Bearman et al., 2017). In contrast to policies and regulations, cultures are usually more silent because most of them are not written down. Nonetheless, they dictate to a certain extent how a faculty sees and prioritises assessment (Bearman et al., 2017; Joughin et al., 2017; Macdonald & Joughin, 2009). If a faculty senses a culture of valuing assessment, they are more likely to participate in upholding standards and changing practice (McCullough & Jones, 2015).

This subsection highlights the relationship between resources, regulations/policies and culture and how they impact on teachers’ work priorities and allocation of time. Academics face a heavy workload on a daily basis and priorities constantly compete with each other. The solid

regulations/policies or systems that value research over teaching consider assessment change as a lower priority. This may create an explicit and implicit culture of research superiority, with less resources and attention given to teaching. It is interesting to investigate if this complex interplay of

regulations/policies/organisational culture and resources also influences the view and practice of Assessment for Learning and the adoption of the rubric policy in this Confucian-heritage university, given that there is a heavy historical tradition of examinations and an international trend of being awarded ranking according to research output.

2.2.5 Summary of Section and Implications

This section has critically discussed the literature related to the current picture of assessment practice in higher education and explained factors contributing to the scenario. In sum, there is general dissatisfaction about the existing assessment practice resulting from its heavy focus on Assessment for Certification globally and the examination-oriented culture locally in Hong Kong (and other countries influenced by the Confucian-heritage culture). Apart from the cultural factor, insufficient assessment literacy appears to limit teachers and management from overturning the dominant practice. In

addition, traditional organisational cultures and regulations and a lack of resources place research over teaching as a priority in many higher education institutions. As such, changes related to teaching improvements receive less attention despite good intentions. These factors all contribute to the current dominant practice of assessment.

Literature knowledge from this section informs the importance of

exploring participants’ perceptions and experiences of assessment practice in this research setting. The information generated allows an understanding of the patterns and focus of assessment practice in this institution, and helps

identify plausible reasons behind the interpretation of the rubric policy and the actualisation of Assessment for Learning and rubrics.