A Fundamental Misalignment: Intended Learning and Assessment Practices in Undergraduate Science Research Projects

Autor/inn/en	Wilson, Anna; Howitt, Susan; Higgins, Denise
Titel	A Fundamental Misalignment: Intended Learning and Assessment Practices in Undergraduate Science Research Projects
Quelle	In: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41 (2016) 6, S.869-884 (16 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0260-2938
DOI	10.1080/02602938.2015.1048505
Schlagwörter	Undergraduate Students; Student Research; Research Projects; Scientific Research; Student Evaluation; Interviews; College Faculty; Intention; Outcomes of Education; Grading; Foreign Countries; Australia + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Studentenforschung; Forschungsvorhaben; Schulnote; Studentische Bewertung; Interviewing; Interviewtechnik; Fakultät; Lernleistung; Schulerfolg; Notengebung; Ausland; Australien
Abstract	Authentic experiences of research are seen as valuable elements of undergraduate science, providing motivation for students and linking the research and teaching activities of academics. But as such experiences are made available to increasing numbers of students as formal, graded parts of the curriculum, important questions are raised about their pedagogical function and the ways in which they are assessed. This article draws on interviews with academics involved in the provision of such experiences to ask: what do academics "intend" that their students learn, and do conventional approaches to project assessment relate clearly and effectively to these intended outcomes? We describe four categories of intended learning and suggest that conventional approaches to assessment are fundamentally misaligned with most of these outcomes. We argue that this is due to the focus of these approaches on the products, rather than the processes and experiences, of research, a focus that partly arises from a sense of discomfort with assessment based on context-dependent judgements informed by subconscious expertise. We further suggest that alternative approaches to assessment could build on academics' own descriptions of the experiences and behaviours they value in students. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01