The following people contributed to this document:

Dr Ethney Genis, Chair, Curriculum Development Work Group did final preparation of this document.

The introduction of outcomes-based education in South Africa has initiated a review of qualifications and their learning programmes in terms of how we define qualifications and design learning programmes.

The definition of qualifications in terms of outcomes, as ‘standards’ and competences, affects the approach, methodology and modes of teaching and learning. Judgment of the achievement of the qualification outcomes hinges on how we assess learners.

This project on assessment was a collaborative effort by technikons to determine what assessment practices would be appropriate, and what changes to current practices were needed.

A study of the literature preceded a two-day workshop in July 2000. The combined output of the research and the vigorous debate at the workshop is reflected in this report.

I wish to thank every person in the technikons who made the effort to participate, contribute and comment. This report makes it possible for technikons, as a sector, to enter into further debate from a common understanding of the issues pertinent to OBET implementation.

Dr Ethney Genis

Chair: Curriculum Development Work Group

1. INTRODUCTION

In traditional education and training, assessment often is the tail that wags the dog (Smith et al., 1997:78; Sutherland & Peckham, 1998:98). For many learners, the "real" curriculum has been "what they have to study for the test/examination/assignment" (Madaus 1997: 29-32). Sutherland and Peckham (1998: 98) formulate it as follows: "Assessment tasks define the curriculum in the sense that students often focus on topics that are to be assessed in the hope of getting good marks".

The introduction of outcomes-based education and training (OBET) requires a different approach. One of the most important aims of an OBET curriculum, is to "lay the foundations for the development of a learning society" (Department of Education, 1997b: 3). Towards this goal, all learning facilitation and assessment methods and strategies should be oriented. The traditional "power" of assessment to influence the curriculum may be advantageous to effecting a change in approach and methodology. The implementation of a different approach to, and use of a range of assessment methods will have a major impact on how learners conceive of their role in the teaching and learning context (Sutherland & Peckham, 1998: 100).

This document unpacks some of the essential concepts that relate to assessment in the OBET context. Its aim is to stimulate the general debate around implementing OBET, and OBET assessment practices in particular. Curriculum design and development is an integrated process where outcomes, assessment criteria, level descriptors, modularization, and learning guides are all considered in terms of their interrelationships. This document therefore forms part of the fundamental study to determine the implications of OBET for higher education. This document should, therefore, be interpreted as an attempt to:

• facilitate alignment of assessment practices and procedures in technikons to those required by an OBET approach, and

• suggest operational criteria and guidelines for assessment in an OBET context.

In this document, the definition, principles, implementation strategies and criteria for assessment in the OBET context are explored from the point of departure that learning facilitators (lecturers) would use this as a resource.

1. DEFINING THE CONCEPT

Many effective definitions of assessment and related concepts have been stated in SAQA documents. These are reflected as Annexure A. Despite the plethora of definitions of assessment, misconceptions about assessment in the OBET context abound, and for that reason the definition of the concept is explored here.

A first issue is to clarify the concepts "assessment" and "evaluation". Scholars agree that evaluation involves more than testing and measuring (UNESCO, 1999:126; McMillan, 1997:10). In the Conceptual dictionary, evaluation is defined as follows: "to put value to something, to assess its worth; to analyse and assess the role or function of something" (Withers, 1994: 79). The notions of "judgment" and "quality" are introduced. According to McMillan (1997: 10), evaluation entails,

… the making of judgments about quality - how good the behavior or performance is. Evaluation involves an interpretation of what has been gathered through measurement.

 

Furthermore, the concepts "standards" and "criteria" are involved in evaluation. McMillan (1997: 10) states:

An important determinant of how you evaluate performance is the nature of performance standards that you employ. Performance standards are what are used to determine whether a performance is 'good' or 'bad'. Criteria also play an important role in the evaluation process. Criteria are the specific behaviors or dimensions that are evinced to successfully attain the standard.

 

The concept evaluation therefore adds two notions to also take note of:

• evaluation involves value judgments based on
• performance standards or criteria.

Evaluation can therefore be based on testing and measurement.

Two new notions are linked to the concept assessment. Firstly, there is the idea that assessment is an umbrella term that encompasses testing, measuring and evaluation. Secondly, there is the notion that assessment leads to decision making.

Withers (1994: 13) defines assessment as

... to make a decision about something, to examine or test the performance of individuals; to evaluate or judge on the basis of criteria such as correctness, validity and empirical evidence; the process and outcome of assessing - an assessment.

 

McMillan (1997: 5) uses a similar definition: "In the classroom context, then, assessment is the gathering, interpretation, and use of information to aid teacher decision making". Even older definitions are based on these two notions. Ward (1980: 3) defines a "scheme of assessment" as "all those methods of assessment and their subdivisions which together make up the assessment for the programme/module and on which the decision concerning the certificate or other award is based".

The prevailing notions included in definitions of assessment are:

• assessment is a process (Ward, 1980: 3) that encompasses testing, measurement and evaluation and
• assessment leads to decision making.

More recent definitions of assessment also focus on the idea that assessment leads to decision making and that it is a continuous process. Salvia and Ysseldyke (1995: front cover page) state: "Assessment, in all its forms, is viewed through the lens of its purpose: namely, making informed decisions about students".

This is a continuous process, "performed to gain an understanding of an individual's strength and weakness in order to make appropriate educational decisions" (Salvia & Ysseldyke, 1995:26). McMillan (1997: 8) states that "Classroom assessment can be defined as the collection, interpretation, and use of information to help teachers make better decisions" about teaching and learning.

A distinction is made between formative and summative assessment. These distinctions become important in the ensuing discussion of assessment in the OBE context. According to McMillan (1997: 106-107),

Formative assessment occurs during a lesson or unit to provide ongoing feedback to the teacher and student. The purpose of formative assessment is to provide correct actions as instruction occurs to enhance student learning … summative assessment …takes place at the end of a unit of study. Its primary purpose is to document student performance after instruction is completed.

 

This distinction underscores the idea that assessment is a continuous process that could take many forms. It also conceives of assessment as an integral part of the teaching/learning process on which the learner and the teachers' decisions about the effectiveness of the educational process can be based.

Based on the definition of SAQA (1999: 6), assessment is defined as:

The structured process of identifying, gathering and interpreting evidence about a learner’s achievement in order to assist the learner’s development, improve the process of learning and teaching and make judgments about the learner’s achievement of outcomes in relation to registered national standards and qualifications.

 

This implies that assessment is a continuous process. If one takes into account that learners learn in different ways, it also implies that a variety of assessment methods should be employed. The main definition pertaining to this document is thus a definition of continuous assessment. It is important to take note that continuous assessment focuses on facilitating LEARNING. Continuous assessment is markedly different from continuous evaluation, where the emphasis is on the evaluation activity and not on the learning process.

The possible "steps" in the continuous assessment process can be summarised as follows:

1. Educator gets to know and understand the module/programme well;
2. Educator plans assessment;
3. Educator informs learner of requirements and ensures they understand their role and responsibility regarding assessment;
4. Educator designs assessment by selecting appropriate methods and instruments and developing material;
5. Educator conducts assessment, which includes collection of evidence;
6. Educator makes judgments and provides feedback to learners;
7. Educator completes administration requirements; and
8. Educator evaluates the process (SAQA, 1999: 26).

In this spirit, continuous assessment is conceptualised to include a variety of assessment methods, administered at certain pre-arranged "places" in the learning process, that all aim to facilitate LEARNING.

Annexure B provides a list of possible assessment methods and instruments. Basically three types of assessment are conceptualised:

1. Informal formative assessment

These involve those diagnostic assessment methods used daily by educators to monitor the teaching/learning process. An example of this is when the educator asks learners to write down and hand in the most important thing they do not understand at the end/middle of a learning event. No "marks" are recorded. The educator uses these learner comments as feedback that would impact on learning/teaching.

2. FORMAL FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

This type of assessment takes places at pre-arranged places during the learning process where learners have to demonstrate competence on achievement of outcomes. Results are recorded. These assessment methods are transparent in terms of assessment criteria and contribution of results to the award of credit. Formal formative assessment is important in the facilitation of the learning process and is used to adjust teaching, learning and future assessment. Detail about formative assessment should be included in study/learning guides.

 

3. SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT

These methods refer to assessment for making judgments about achievements. This assessment often occurs at the end of a learning programme/module. Results are expressed in terms of competence achieved with regard to a learning program outcome. Results from summative assessment are used to record, report and award credits.

The following grid attempts to graphically represent this conceptualisation of continuous assessment.

It is conceptualized that detail about assessment would be recorded in two documents:

• The Learning/Study guide

The purpose of this document is to inform the learner in detail about assessment planned for this teaching/learning process. Details to include are:

- Assessment criteria;

- Dates/deadlines;

- Outcomes that are assessed; and

• What results are used for.

• The Assessment Guide:

All educators involved with this module/programme would use this document. It highlights the motivation for assessment during the teaching/learning process. It should preferably form part of a bigger document with more information about the module/programme. Details about the assessment plan for the module/programme should be included. The assessment plan should include:

• Outcomes to be assessed;
• Number and types of assessment methods that will be used;
• Assessment criteria;
• Use of results;
• Dated/deadlines;
• Recording grid (marks);
• Evaluation of assessment after feedback of learners; and
• Assessment detail to communicate to learners in learning/study guide.

1. PHILOSOPHICAL UNDERPINNINGS AND PRINCIPLES

It is not possible to share all the philosophical underpinnings of OBET in this document. This section aims to identify and focus on those philosophical OBET principles that particularly pertain to assessment. The principles identified by the Durban work group are:

• Creation of a learning society

One of the main aims of OBET is to "lay the foundations for the development of a learning society (Department of education, 1997b: 3). The major criterion for evaluation of assessment in an OBET context therefore is - did the assessment provide opportunities for student learning? McMillan (1997: 49) also expresses this notion: "High-quality classroom assessments, then, are technically sound and provide results that demonstrate and improve targeted student learning".

• Integratedness

The underlying idea that assessment, teaching and learning are integrated helps to focus all these educational processes on learning outcomes. Assessment is not seen as the end product of teaching and learning, but rather as a continuous process that provides feedback to the learner and the teacher about the teaching and learning outcomes. The following statement illustrates this notion

Evidence collection for use in assessment will be on-going, linked with the normal course of learning or working and not from once-off assessment occasions (Department of Education, 1997a: 19).

 

The principle of "integratedness" is also linked to the notion of "authentic" assessment (Welch, 1999: 14). Ultimately, learning should enable learners to function in the real world. Assessment should therefore aim to be authentic in the sense that it integrates the teaching/learning context as closely as possible to the real world. This principle refers to a holistic (rather than an atomistic) approach to learning and to the integrated nature of learning programmes and assessment activities. Assessment is part of and contributes to the learning process.

• Expanded opportunity

Different types of assessment should be used to afford all learners different opportunities to be assessed in different ways.

• Continuous process

A very important principle is that assessment is a "continuous" and "ongoing" process. A statement that illustrates is: "Assessment … will be on-going. That means that a learner's progress will be monitored continuously" (Department of Education, 1997a: 19). This is strongly linked to the notion of lifelong learning. Lubisi et al., (1997b:17) puts is as follows:

The importance of self-assessment and peer assessment cannot be over-stressed, as this also helps to prepare each South African as a citizen, family member, employer and employee, to play an important role in their own and others' life-long learning environment.

 

• Openness and transparency

This principle emphasises that learners should be informed regarding criteria, method and context of assessment. Expectations must be made clear as well.

• Accountability

This principle redirects the responsibility for learning from the institution to the learner. Learners in an OBET context have to accept responsibility for their own learning progress. In this spirit, self- and peer-assessment are regarded as important assessment strategies.

• Equity

A striving for equity underpins OBET assessment. Concerning the principle of equity, it is important to remember that the current education system is in a transformation phase. Current South African education is a result of inequitable distribution of money and human resources along racial lines for many years. True equity will be a struggle that might continue for several decades. Several learners in South African schools and institutions of higher learning are still disadvantaged. One example of inequity that prevails today is not to consider levels of English second language proficiency of learners and its possible effect on academic achievement. Without the necessary cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP), a learner could be severely hampered in trying to internalise a mass of unestablished concepts. Third language users should be provided with some sort of language support applicable to the programmes they are involved with.

The following statement illustrates the principle of equity at work in the assessment context: "Assessment … methods will not disadvantage individuals or groups by hindering or limiting them in ways unrelated to the evidence sought" (Department of Education, 1997a: 19). Assessment should be conducted in such a way that all learners have an equal chance to succeed at it. This is demonstrated in the notion that assessment criteria are communicated overtly at the onset of a module. This should enable every learner to monitor her/his progress towards mastering the outcomes involved.

• Quality

A strive for quality underpins OBET assessment. The setting of minimum criteria for achievement of outcomes determines certain "standards" against which a learner can demonstrate mastery of an outcome. Continuous, coherent and progressive assessment is seen as "one of the key elements in the quality assurance system" (Department of Education, 1998b: 2).

• Flexibility

The idea of a flexible assessment strategy that gives feedback to learners about their learning achievements underpins assessment in the OBET context. When learners are ready to demonstrate that they mastered an outcome, the ideal is that they should have the opportunity to do so. The focus on the individual progress of each learner towards achieving the learning outcomes implies that assessment should be flexible and should provide feedback useful to every individual learner about her/his progress.

Another important consequence of the principle of flexibility is the idea that a variety of assessment methods should be employed in an OBET context (Sutherland & Peckham, 1998: 98, 99, 103; Welch, 1999: 13). This has two implications: educators should review all assessment procedures in use and ensure that they involve sufficient numbers and types of assessment that will result in deep learning for their learners (Sutherland & Peckham, 1998: 103).

All the above principles will have important implications for implementation. An important misconception to address at this point is that the call to use a variety of methods implies that every assignment / task should test knowledge, skills and attitudes (where appropriate). An educator's assessment strategy should demonstrate that a variety of strategies were used across the learning programme (Welch, 1999: 13). Another misconception is the idea that summative examination is now taboo. In the OBET context, if motivated, summative assessment has its place - the emphasis, however, should be on informal and formal ongoing formative assessment. Instead of being the most important assessment event, summative assessment becomes one of several other assessment strategies to use.

1. IMPLEMENTATION: A MODEL OF CONTINUOUS ASSESSMENT

SAQA proposes an integrated model of assessment, which includes a variety of assessment methods including a balance of formative, diagnostic and summative assessments (SAQA, 2000: 28 – 29). Integrated assessment requires:

• An integrated program design;
• A broader range of performance to be assessed;
• Deeper levels of understanding;

• Reflection about actions and products that comprise the idea of an applied competency; and
• Evaluation of the learner’s ability to integrate knowledge and skills rather than assessing cognitive and performance mastery of one learning area only.

The implementation of such a model of assessment therefore requires the creation of an enabling environment – one in which integrated assessment is made possible. This is not true for many Technikons, as:

• Programme design still rests on subjects that are mutually exclusive;
• Administrative systems are not designed to accommodate the recording of integrated assessments that are performed across different subjects;
• Learners, educators and other stakeholders, such as parents, have not undergone the necessary training regarding the change in paradigm from content-based to outcomes-based; and
• Policy regarding modularisation and level descriptors has not yet been defined and, therefore, not yet been implemented.

The implementation of a truly outcomes-based system would therefore require drastic changes to current practices in higher education.

The model of continuous assessment requires that feedback from one assessment informs the design of the next assessment. Educators would therefore need to implement an assessment strategy that introduces different types of assessments throughout the presentation of a module. Educators will also need to spend more time providing the learner with constructive feedback when performing formative or diagnostic assessment. If this is not done, then learners will not know where they have erred or how to make corrections. Assessment is therefore a cyclic process that not only monitor’s the learner’s progress, but that also assists the learner in making progress (Olivier, 2000: 3). Olivier describes the learning cycle in five steps (Olivier, 2000: 49). These steps need to be performed by the learner if an outcome is to be achieved:

• Preparing for specific activities;
• Performing and monitoring the tasks determined by the preparation;
• Concluding or completing these tasks;
• Interacting with the different elements of an outcome; and
• Assessing the afore-going process through self-, peer-, tutor- and client assessment (Olivier, 2000: 49).

This process applies to each outcome that the learner is attempting to master. It is therefore not a series of completed cycles that follow one after another, but rather different cycles occurring simultaneously and lasting for different periods of time.

The principle of "expanded opportunity" underlying OBE requires that a variety of assessment methods are used (Spady, 1994: 12). This is to support the notion that different learners learn in different ways. Some learners excel at writing their thoughts down; others prefer responding to questions verbally or being assessed through presentations. The picture below summarises the philosophy underlying outcomes-based assessment.

A common interpretation of OBET is that pen and paper tests and exams are abolished. This is not so. The emphasis is on the notion of using a variety of assessment methods rather than emphasising the importance of one method of assessment, such as examinations, which was true of assessment in the past.

When contemplating the afore-going discussion it becomes apparent that much must be done in order to create an enabling environment for the implementation of OBET. It would therefore be unreasonable to even suggest that current practice should change with immediate effect. It is proposed that a gradual process be introduced to provide for the training and sensitisation of educators and learners. This could, for instance, be performed over a period of five years:

It is vital that mechanisms are put in place that will monitor progress and provide the necessary feedback to the different stakeholders. The CTM-NQF Curriculum Development Committee, through the Curriculum Development Work Group, can play a vital role as monitor and coordinator of this process

1. TECHNIQUES/METHODS

SAQA describes assessment methods as the activity that the assessor engages in when performing assessments (SAQA, 2000: 12). Three activities are used:

• Observation;
• Evaluation of product; and
• Questioning.

Differentiation is also made between assessment methods (as described above) and assessment instruments.

Annexure B presents a variety of assessment instruments that can be used when performing assessments in the OBET context. Although it is not possible to use all these methods in each of one’s classrooms, it is desirable that some of the methods be used. It is also important to note that some methods are more suited to large groups (more than 30), whereas others are more effectively used in smaller groups (30 or less).

1. ASSESSMENT BANDS

Outcomes-based education requires that learner be assessed against outcomes, using assessment criteria, to determined competence. Performance can therefore be categorised into three groups, namely: competent, not yet competent or excellent. However, discussion with educators and individuals representing different educational institutions emphasise the resistance that will be received when moving away from some sort of grading system. The proposal is therefore to gradually replace a system that relies heavily on percentages, to one that grades performance in bands. Initially five bands can be used (cf. Table 2).

Table 2: Suggested bands to be used for grading learner performance

Another grading system that has already received some attention is the Solo Taxonomy. Biggs and Collis (1982) developed this taxonomy and it proposes five levels of learning that learners pass through (Asquith & Lombard, 2000: 52). This system attempts to provide a qualitative description of the growth of competence of a learner for a particular task. The five levels are: prestructural, unistructural, multistructural, relational and extended abstract. The following table (Table 3) explains the response levels and interpretations conceptualised as part of the Solo Taxonomy:

Table 3: Response levels and interpretations – Solo Taxonomy (Asquith & Lombard, 2000: 52; Lombard & Meyer, 2000: 90)

It is important to realise that the introduction of another type of grading system would require the sensitisation of, not only learners, but also of parents, employers and other stakeholders interested in the performance of learners.

5 IMPLICATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

Implementing new methods of assessment and assessment strategies will have a great impact on the provision of education and training in Higher Education Institutions. This impact needs to be carefully analysed and the implications thereof carefully considered. Changes that cannot be accommodated or implemented within the HET Band need to be identified and addressed.

The following aspects will be affected most by changes in assessment practice:

• Academic staff;
• The learners and the learning situation;
• Administration, Finance and Resources;
• Institutional Systems; and
• Institutional and sector policies.

Each of these are discussed separately in the next section.

Academic staff will need to be sensitised to the fact that although contact time might be reduced as a result of a change in the role from lecturer to facilitator, the workload will not be reduced. In fact the workload might increase. This would be as a result of the time that they will need to spend on developing materials and rethinking old models. Involving learners in the learning cycle, especially in large classes, is very demanding. However, the successful implementation of OBET rests on the assumption that change must occur consistently, systematically and appropriately. Much work will need to be done regarding the implementation of OBET practice in classrooms with large numbers of students.

Something that has already been mentioned in this document is the issue of grading. The move from contents-based teaching to outcomes-based learning requires that less emphasis is placed on the importance of grading. Emphasis needs to be placed on the achievement of outcomes.

Priority needs to be placed on the orientation of learners to the introduction of OBE, specifically to the introduction of an OBE model of assessment. Without the necessary paradigm shift, learners will not be convinced of the necessity to take responsibility for learning, and will therefore not benefit from the efforts of educators to make the necessary changes. Mechanisms, such as comprehensive study and assessment guides, need to be put in place so that learners are empowered to accept responsibility for their own learning. Learners will also need to be equipped with mechanisms that will enable them to manage the changes and the impact of it on their own situation.

Hand-in-hand with the shift of responsibility from educator to learner regarding learning, is the nurturing of a culture of learning. Learners need to be guided into a new culture, that of the culture of life long learning. This can only be facilitated by the convincing sensitisation through training and educator guidance.

3. ADMINISTRATION, FINANCE AND TECHNIKON RESOURCES

Outcomes-based education is expensive: educators spend more time on planning, facilitating and assessing learning; learners need access to a variety of resources that might not have been available in the past; and facilities need to be able to accommodate a different style of learning. These are just a few examples of the financial impact of the introduction of OBET. These same examples illustrate the impact of a change in assessment policy on the availability and use of resources. It will no longer be acceptable to simply assess learners within a classroom context. Provision needs to be made for the simulation of situations that cannot be captured, for assessment purposes, in reality. Attempts at including an experiential learning component in all programmes must be investigated.

External moderators need to be sourced and sensitised to the changes in the provisioning of education and training at tertiary level. More time will need to be spent on quality assurance, not only of assessments, but of the standard of teaching or facilitation offered by educators. Providing constructive feedback to students is an activity that demands more time.

Administrative and faculty staff will also need to be retrained and made aware of the impact of the change to OBET on the way in which their work is performed.

Another facet is record keeping. If the model of continuous assessment is implemented and the emphasis on grading is shifted, it will be necessary to change the way in which records are kept by educators, and by the institution’s administration.

Although many references have already been made regarding the impact of the introduction of another assessment mode,l emphasis needs to be placed on specific issues. Without institutional support for the implementation of OBET and, specifically, the mode of assessment, the paradigm shift will not be complete and the attempt at change will be unsuccessful. Included in the notion of the creation of an enabling environment is the support provided to academic staff in facilitating the change of mode of delivery, assistance and appropriate systemic adjustments with regard to the recording of results, the provision and accessibility of resources required by educators and the implementation of an efficient and effective system that will facilitate the liaison between tertiary provider, quality assurer (HEQC) and SAQA.

Underlying this whole process is the assumption that it carries the full support of the Senior Management at every Technikon. This can only be gained through training, sensitisation and buy-in.

The creation of an enabling environment is not only an institutional process, but one that is supported by policies and processes upheld in the sector. For instance, the funding formulae used to determine the provision and distribution of government funding to tertiary institutions needs to be changed. If the emphasis is moved from high pass rates to ultimate competence, then pass rates cannot be the criteria used to determine the distribution of funding.

At institutional level, policies such as that of the examination and admissions policies will need to be revisited. The use of a variety of methods of assessment and the adoption of a continuous assessment model cannot be accommodated in the present policy. Providing a fair and cost-effective recognition of prior learning system will also impact heavily on policies and resources.

6. CONCLUSION

The cost and time implication of implementing the continuous assessment model across the higher education sector (specifically referring to Technikons) will be enormous but will have positive gains if it is approached systematically and with leadership.

ANNEXURE A: Glossary

Assessment methods include (SAQA, s.a.: 12):

• Observation: the learner’s competence is determined through observing her/his ability to perform a given task or activity.
• Evaluation of a product: the learner’s competence is measured by evaluating a finished product made according to certain criteria.
• Questioning: learners are asked question relating to the knowledge and skills required to be deemed competent. This can be done verbally or in writing.

Assessment instruments that can be used include:

Table 4: Assessment instruments

It is impossible to give an overview of ALL possible assessment methods. In this Annexure, four (4) assessment methods are described briefly:

1. Self-assessment;
2. Peer assessment;
3. Teacher assessment; and
4. Portfolio assessment.

Readers are encouraged to read more about these methods on their own. These brief descriptions should be regarded as an introduction to these methods. Before you utilise them, you need to read much more about them.

1. Self-assessment

 

Self-assessment refers to opportunities given to learners to assess their own progress or learning. This implies that criteria for an outcome has to be defined and learners are asked to assess their own efforts to determine the extent to which the criteria have been met (Gravett, 1996: 80-81; Sutherland & Peckham, 1998: 99-100; Welch, 1999: 14-15). This type of assessment work towards guiding learners to accept and start to exercise intellectual autonomy. According to Gravett (1996: 81) "Intellectual autonomy implies firstly that one must be able to appraise and monitor the quality of one's own performance". A further benefit of self-assessment is that it leads to effective learning. It leads to the ability to reflect on and to criticise one's own learning. Self-assessment "provides learners with an opportunity to take responsibility for their own learning and it gives learners greater ownership of the learning which they undertake" (Gravett, 1996: 81). The idea is that learners contribute to the establishment of the criteria for assessment and then use these criteria to assess their own learning.

 

It is very important to prepare learners properly before self-assessment is used. They should understand the rationale behind self-assessment (to take responsibility for one's own learning) and they should know exactly what is expected of them and to what purposes the self-assessment will be put (Gravett, 1996: 81). The teacher could act as moderator of self-assessment and, if moderation is part of the arrangements, should also give feedback to learners about the quality of their own self-assessment.

 

2. Peer assessment

Another method that could be used to implement ongoing informal formative assessment is peer assessment. As with self-assessment, the idea underlying peer assessment is "to develop a deeper learning experience" (Brindley & Scoffield, 1998: 80). MacAlpine (1999: 17) believes that peer assessment should be seen as a "learning experience in exercising judgment and assessment, and a first step in developing [the] … ability to assess [one's] … own work and [one's] … own strengths and weaknesses in a realistic manner". Furthermore, the focus of peer evaluations is on "analysis and the constructive, supportive criticism of strategies, styles, and other concrete aspects of the product" (McMillan, 1997: 245). This is therefore a method that is very suitable to the purposes of OBE assessment in general and ongoing informal formative assessment in particular.

As in the case of self-assessment, it is very important that learners have a clear understanding of the purpose of the assessment (Brindley & Scoffield, 1998: 81). In a survey done after peer assessment was conducted with a group of learners, the following are mentioned as benefits of peer assessment by participating learners (Brindley & Scoffield, 1998: 84):

• It helped them to gain knowledge and understanding
• It allowed active participation in the assessment process that alleviated boredom, increased concentration and made learners feel more motivated
• Increased motivation resulted from the learners being able to express their own opinions
• They welcomed the opportunity to compare work against peers.

The learners mentioned the following criticism on the peer assessment experience (Brindley & Scoffield, 1998: 85):

• It was difficult to avoid personal bias - they often felt more favourable towards their friends
• Learners are not confident about their own capability to assess and it was a difficult process because of this and
• Learners encountered difficulties in the interpretation of assessment criteria.

Another important outcome to mention is that participating learners are of the opinion that they will perform better as a result of participating in the peer assessment process. Peer assessment (like self-assessment) therefore could help learners to develop into more autonomous learners. Finally, in the everyday work context, it is occasionally required of colleagues to assess each others' work. Experience in peer assessment could help learners prepare for this situation (Brindley & Scoffield, 1998: 86; MacAlpine, 1999: 16). Like Brindley and Scoffield (1998), MacAlpine (1999: 24) also finds that the peer assessment experience

appeared to engender a more enthusiastic response and a greater confidence in making assessments, which, it is hoped, leads to the next step, the assessment of their own performance and needs; and this self-knowledge should increase the motivation, confidence and ability to be a lifelong learner.

 

The researchers also comment that there is a clear resistance by learners to be involved in peer assessment (Brindley & Scoffield, 1998: 86). A very important conclusion from this particular study is that

It is suggested that students need to undergo attitudinal change towards their learning roles and need practice in more self-evaluative role behaviours if peer assessment is to become more acceptable and successful (Brindley & Scoffield, 1998: 86).

 

Sutherland and Peckham (1998: 100) raise a similar concern about learner readiness for OBE assessment in general and self-assessment in particular. They state:

There is also a pressing need to change students' perceptions about assessment: at present many students see assessment as a punitive and discriminatory exercise. Few students see assessment as an opportunity to enhance their own skills and knowledge. Students are often highly resistant to new methodologies, and in particular to continuous assessment practices … This has implications for self-assessment.

 

The holy grail in higher education is the potion with which active engagement in learning can be effected inside learners. In an OBE context the learner is viewed as "an active seeker and constructor of knowledge, rather than a passive receiver" (Sutherland & Peckham, 1998: 100). OBE learners should realise "that it is only the learner who can learn and implement decisions about his or her own learning" (Sutherland & Peckham, 1999: 100). There are serious doubts in the minds of many teachers about when our learners will be ready for this approach. In ten years' time, learners who underwent OBE at high school might be naturally adjusted to this system. At the moment, this is not the case. Preparing current higher education learners for OBE might become the crucial element in successful implementation of OBE in higher learning institutions in South Africa. Some further reading on the implementation of peer assessment could include: MacPherson (1999), Cheng and Warren (1999).

For teacher assessment as part of on-going informal formative assessment to be effective, the purpose of this type of assessment should be kept in mind clearly: this is a kind of diagnostic assessment that should guide the teacher's planning. The role of the teacher as assessment agent here should be focused on giving the learner feedback about her/his achievement of the set criteria of the task assessed. Effective communication about learner achievement is a prerequisite for the provision of quality education. A report must convey a clear impression of personal knowledge of the learner, summarise achievement and progress and provide useful feedback to evaluate and improve learning and teaching (Department of education, 1998: 6). After this assessment the learner should know exactly what she/he achieved and where and how her/his effort does not meet the set criteria.

Apart from these assessment methods (self-, peer- and teacher-assessment), other ways in which to conduct on-going informal formative assessment include:

• Conducting short pre-tests - preferably in the multiple choice mode that could be computer marked. The aim of pre-tests should be to whet learners' appetites for the learning to come and to give the teacher feedback about possible misconceptions learners may hold about the learning to come (Sutherland & Peckham. 1998: 101).
• Asking questions in class and getting oral responses from learners.
• Learners could be asked to reflect for two minutes on teaching/learning events at the end. As outcome of their reflection they could write down the MIP (most important point) I learned today / thing I still do not understand. This could be the starting point for the next meeting (Austin, date unknown: 1).
• Following on the previous suggestion, teachers could ask learners to write down the MOST IMPORTANT POINT that became clear to them / the single thing they still do NOT UNDERSTAND at the end of a teaching/learning event on a piece of paper. The teacher can take these slips of paper in and can analyse the problems experienced by learners from them. This could have a major impact on (redirection) the ensuing teaching/learning events (Austin, date unknown: 1).
• Asking all learners at the end of a teaching/learning event to summarise the main learning focus of the event. Learners could also be asked to state the main learning focus in a two minute presentation at the end of the event (Austin, date unknown: 1).
• A more labour intensive way to stimulate self-reflection is to ask learners to keep a student learning journal that reflects on their feelings/experiences during the learning period they spend with you. See Wagner's (1999) discussion of types of learner journals (also mentioned in Sutherland & Peckham, 1998: 102) and a discussion of how to employ this method. It is claimed that journal writing helps learners to "integrate theory and practice, stimulate critical thinking and reflection on practice and promote professional development" (Wagner, 1999: 263).

Some other strategies to consider are: problem-solving, case studies, debates, role plays and games.

A variety of ways of demonstrating competence across a range of contexts form part of the on-going formal continuous assessment strategies. These assessment opportunities should be structured so that they can lead to the award of marks or grades that can be recorded and integrated in summative assessment. The ideal is also that these tasks should be interesting and demanding tasks which motivate and support learning and should be accompanied by helpful feedback to the learner as well as formal recording of results. This element should be internally assessed and may be externally moderated when appropriate.

Traditional assessment strategies like assignments and class/semester tests form part of this type of assessment. The same principles for designing tests previously still hold: tests must be valid, reliable and feasible. They will be discussed in more detail in the next section. An alternative to these traditional methods is that of portfolio assessment.

This method has been used very effectively for many years as an assessment method in fine arts and other disciplines such as architecture, modeling, photography and journalism (McMillan, 1997: 231). It is gaining popularity as an alternative method of "collecting and evaluating student work over time" (McMillan, 1997: 230; Sutherland & Peckham, 1998: 102).

In the educational context, a portfolio is defined as

… a purposeful, systematic process of collecting and evaluating student products to document progress toward the attainment of learning targets

(McMillan, 1997: 231).

 

An important matter in the process of setting up portfolio assessment is learner participation. This takes the form of learner input at the commencement of the portfolio assessment on what is included in the portfolio, what are criteria of selection of material and what scoring criteria are used. Self-assessment of the portfolio is another way of learner involvement - this should be based on evidence of learner reflection on what has been accomplished. The use of assessment criteria in the form of a "checklist" or "mark sheet" could direct this self-assessment (Sutherland & Peckham, 1998: 102).

The essential characteristics of a portfolio are:

• It is purposeful - there are clear reasons why certain work is included and how the portfolio will be used
• It is a systematic, well-organised collection of materials
• Pre-established guidelines make it clear what materials should be included
• Learners are engaged in the process by giving input on the selection of material to include and their own self-assessment of the portfolio
• There are clear scoring criteria that makes it easy to document progress as reflected in the portfolio
• At different times teacher/learner conferences are held to assess the

progress of the portfolio and to identify areas that need further improvement.

Three of the biggest advantages of portfolio assessment are that it focuses on the improvement of learning, that it engages learners in the assessment process and that it is an ongoing process (McMillan, 1997: 232-233). The major disadvantage of using portfolio assessment is that scoring is time-consuming and inter-rater reliability is difficult to obtain (McMillan, 1997: 234-235). The following table presents a summary of advantages and disadvantages of portfolio assessment (McMillan, 1997: 233):

The following steps must be followed while planning for portfolio assessment:

• Define the purpose of assessment

This includes the specific learning targets involved and the use of the portfolio. Three uses for the portfolio are: documentation, showcasing and evaluation (McMillan, 1997: 237). If the portfolio is used for evaluation, there will be greater standardisation about what to include and how the portfolios are to be reviewed.

• Identify physical structure

Once the purpose has been identified, you must consider the practical aspects of the portfolio. What documents must be included and how will documents be arranged?

• Determine the sources of content

The content should consist of learner work samples and learner and teacher evaluation.

• Determine learner self-reflective guidelines and scoring criteria

Prior to implementation you and the learners have to establish guidelines for learner reflection and the scoring criteria you (and the learners - optional) will use when evaluating the performance.

The following steps are involved in implementing portfolio assessment:

• Review with learners

Many learners are not familiar with portfolios and you will have to explain carefully what is involved and what they will be doing. If possible, show them examples of what you expect.

• Supplying portfolio content

Learners should be the main suppliers of portfolio content. You will have to determine clear guidelines about the number of samples to include and how the portfolio should be organised. See §5 for a discussion of the learning guide - in this section the learning guide in conceptualised as a "portfolio".

• Learner self-evaluations

"One of the most challenging aspects of using portfolios is getting learners to the point where they are comfortable, confident, and accurate in analyzing and criticizing their own work" (Mc Millan, 1997: 243). You will have to provide them with opportunities to exercise this skill. This includes familiarising themselves with the scoring criteria that will be used and allowing them opportunities to exercise their skill in assessing their own work accurately.

• Teacher evaluation

There are several ways in which teachers can evaluate the contents of portfolios: checklists of contents, portfolio structure evaluation, evaluation of individual entries, evaluation of entire contents.

• Learner-teacher conferences

The final step in the process (prior to returning the learner's portfolio to her/him), is conducting a conference with each learner to review the portfolio contents, their reflections (and/or self-assessment), the teacher's evaluation of individual items and of all the work together as related to the learning targets. Conferences with learners should be scheduled throughout the process of portfolio construction. Give learners an agenda for these meetings so that they come prepared.