2011
Final Report
FACILITATING COMMENCING STUDENTS’ SUCCESS
WITH EARLY ASSESSMENT
Project Team
Professor Keithia Wilson, Griffith University
Professor Alf Lizzio, Griffith University
Professor Nick Buys, Griffith University
Associate Professor Alison Dean, The University of Newcastle
Dr Kym Cowley, The University of Newcastle
Kate Lindsay, The University of Newcastle
Project Officers
Kobie Allison, Griffith University
Andrew Milne, The University of Newcastle
Research Assistants
Katrina Humphreys, Griffith University
Karla Norris, Griffith University
Stacey Vervoort, Griffith University
Report Authors
Professor Keithia Wilson, Griffith University
Professor Alf Lizzio, Griffith University
1
report title goes here
The Australian Learning and Teaching Council has provided funding for this
(project/activity –
use whichever word is appropriate).
Support for this project has been provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching
Council Ltd., an initiative of the Australian Government. The views expressed in this
report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Learning and Teaching
Council or the Australian Government.
This work is published under the terms of the Creative Commons AttributionNoncommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Australia Licence. Under this Licence you are free to
copy, distribute, display and perform the work and to make derivative works.
Attribution: You must attribute the work to the original authors and include the
following statement: Support for the original work was provided by the Australian
Learning and Teaching Council Ltd, an initiative of the Australian Government.
Noncommercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
Share Alike: If you alter, transform, or build on this work, you may distribute the
resulting work only under a licence identical to this one.
For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the licence terms of
this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you obtain permission from the
copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/au/ > or send a letter to:
Creative Commons
543 Howard Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco California 94105
USA.
Requests and inquiries concerning these rights should be addressed to:
Australian Learning and Teaching Council
PO Box 2375
Strawberry Hills NSW 2012
Australia
Street address:
Level 14, 300 Elizabeth Street
Surry Hills NSW 2010
Australia
Telephone:
Facsimile:
Web:
02 8667 8500
02 8667 8515
www.altc.edu.au
2011
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
2
Contents
Acknowledgements....................................................................................................... 4
List of Tables ............................................................................................................... 5
List of Figures .............................................................................................................. 6
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 7
Overview ...................................................................................................................... 8
Understanding Commencing Students’ Appraisals of Assessment ............................. 11
The Impact of Commencing Students’ Appraisals of Assessment ............................... 16
Motivating First-Year students with Assessment ......................................................... 19
Helping First-Year Students Develop a Sense of Purpose .......................................... 27
Facilitating First-Year Students Seeking and Finding Help.......................................... 30
Understanding Academic Staff Perceptions of Assessment ........................................ 41
Understanding Professional Staff Perspectives of Assessment .................................. 50
Enabling Commencing Students through the Assessment Process ............................ 54
Supporting the Success of At-risk Commencing Students .......................................... 61
Talking With Our Students About Assessment............................................................ 70
References ................................................................................................................. 76
Appendix: Resources to Support Academic Recovery Intervention ............................ 78
Student Workbook ............................................................................................. 79
Tutor Evaluation Form ....................................................................................... 95
Sample Invitation ............................................................................................... 97
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
3
Acknowledgements
Report Authors
Professor Keithia Wilson
Griffith University
Professor Alf Lizzio
Griffith University
Project Team
Professor Keithia Wilson
Griffith University (Project Leader)
Professor Alf Lizzio
Griffith University
Professor Nick Buys
Griffith University
Associate Professor Alison Dean
The University of Newcastle
Dr Kym Cowley
The University of Newcastle
Ms Kate Lindsay
The University of Newcastle
Project Officers
Ms Kobie Allison
Griffith University
Mr Andrew Milne
The University of Newcastle
Research Assistants
Ms Katrina Humphreys
Griffith University
Ms Karla Norris
Griffith University
Ms Stacey Vervoort
Griffith University
Reference
This report should be cited as follows:
Wilson, K. & Lizzio, A. (2011). Facilitating commencing students’ success with early
assessment. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Sydney; Australia.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
4
List of Tables
Table 1
Domain of assessment motivation strategies employed by academic staff
teaching commencing students .............................................................. 20
Table 2
Students’ perceptions of their influence on help-seeking and help-finding
............................................................................................................... 32
Table 3
Staff perceptions of students’ processes in help-seeking and help-finding
............................................................................................................... 33
Table 4
Students’ perceptions of staff influence on help-seeking and help-finding
............................................................................................................... 34
Table 5
System’ factors influencing student help-seeking and help-finding ......... 35
Table 6
Academics’ conceptions of the purposes of first-year assessment ......... 42
Table 7
Academic staff: working relationships with first-year students ................ 45
Table 8
Contrasting narrative themes in academics’ conceptions of higher
education ............................................................................................... 48
Table 9
Professional staff descriptions of common issues with first-year
assessment tasks ................................................................................... 51
Table 10
Professional staff descriptions of common study challenges experienced
by commencing students ........................................................................ 51
Table 11
Structure of the First Assessment First Feedback workbook .................. 65
Table 12
Potential hierarchy of academic recovery interventions .......................... 69
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
5
List of Figures
Figure 1
The assessment lifecycle: Student perspective ........................................ 9
Figure 2
The assessment lifecycle: Staff perspective ........................................... 10
Figure 3
First-year students’ emotional responses to assessment ....................... 15
Figure 4
Influence of perceived assessment characteristics on student’s’
engagement and performance ............................................................... 18
Figure 5
The relationship of students’ deep, surface and achieving study
approaches to their engagement with assessment ................................. 24
Figure 6
The relationship of students’ sense of purpose to their approaches to
study and engagement with assessment ................................................ 24
Figure 7
Domains of commencing student identity and purpose ........................... 25
Figure 8
Conceptual overview of factors influencing student help-seeking and helpfinding .................................................................................................... 31
Figure 9
Hierarchy of help sources in a learning environment facilitating self
regulated learning .................................................................................. 39
Figure 10
Help system over the lifecycle of semester ............................................. 41
Figure 11
Academics’ conceptions of the purposes of first-year assessment ......... 44
Figure 12
Academic staff: working relationships with first-year students ............... 47
Figure 13
Conceptual map of first-year cultures ..................................................... 48
Figure 14
The territorial relationship ....................................................................... 52
Figure 15
The good cop-bad cop relationship ........................................................ 52
Figure 16
The mutual partnership relationship ....................................................... 53
Figure 17
Effective and sustainable assessment systems ...................................... 55
Figure 18
The First Assessment First Feedback process ....................................... 63
Figure 19
Conceptual framework for helping commencing students reflect on their
management of assessment .................................................................. 64
Figure 20
Students’ appraisal of assessment tasks: Phase 1 early in semester .... 73
Figure 21
Students’ appraisal of assessment tasks: Phase 2 around submission . 74
Figure 22
Students’ appraisal of assessment tasks: Phase 3 feedback and feed
forward ................................................................................................... 75
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
6
Executive Summary
This project aimed to enhance the academic success and motivation of commencing students
by advancing practice in the area of first-year assessment. The project investigated first-year
assessment from the perspective of commencing students, academic staff and professional
staff and applied the findings to develop practice frameworks and protocols to guide both staff
and commencing students in the process of undertaking and managing assessment.
Analysis of student data from interviews and focus group discussions across a range of
disciplines and types of assessment revealed that commencing students are concerned with a
set of recurring themes in relation to assessment. Students try to ‘make sense’ of assessment
tasks in terms of perceived: stakes (how important is this assessment task?), motivation (do I
care about this task?), capacity (can I do this?), justice (do I think this is fair?), and support
(what help is provided?). Analysis of students’ responses to subsequent quantitative surveys
confirmed that both the content and management of assessment tasks affects students’ sense
of academic confidence and their level of motivation or engagement.
Motivating students to engage with assessment was identified as a particularly challenging
task. Students identified three major clusters of strategies that influenced their motivation on
assessment tasks: engaging design, enabling support and the authoritative expectations of
teachers. However more fine-grained analysis revealed that the ‘motivational value’ of these
strategies varied as a function of students’ approaches to study. Students with a deep
approach to study (seeking understanding) were most strongly motivated by engaging,
authentic and stimulating tasks. However students with a surface approach to study (focus on
facts) found engaging assessment to be somewhat de-motivating. Establishing a sense of
purpose was found to strongly influence students toward a deep approach and away from a
surface approach to study. A range of ‘purpose building’ strategies were identified.
Given the sector-wide concern to improve the success and retention of commencing students
the factors that potentially impact students’ capacity to seek and find help with learning in
general and with assessment specifically, were considered a priority for further investigation.
Through focus group and interview processes staff and students identified the factors that
facilitated or hindered help seeking, learning and problem solving. Findings informed the
development of a framework for the design of a sustainable help system that would support
student self-regulation.
Academic staff with responsibility for first-year courses across a range of disciplines were
interviewed regarding their assessment practices. Academic staff identified a diverse range of
purposes for first-year assessment and these were found to be influenced by their values
regarding the purposes of higher education and their perceptions of appropriate working
relationships with students. Frameworks were developed to facilitate staff development.
Professional staff (e.g., learning advisors) who provided support services for commencing
students were also interviewed regarding their perceptions of the assessment process.
Professional staff confirmed the themes previously identified by academic staff and students.
Patterns of working relationships between professional staff, academic and students were
explored for functional and dysfunctional dynamics. A negotiated partnership model was
proposed as necessary to support effective assessment practice.
Findings from the above studies were integrated into a conceptual framework to guide staff
design and management of first-year assessment and an interview protocol which staff can
use to investigate their own local assessment systems.
Finally, the project investigated processes that may assist commencing students who failed or
underperformed on their first piece of university assessment. The First Assessment First
Feedback process, based on self-regulation principles, was found to be effective as an
academic recovery strategy. Recommendations are made about the suitability of such
interventions with differing causes of student failure on assessment.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
7
Overview
Purpose
The overarching purpose of this project was to enable and empower both staff and
commencing students to be conscious and active co-creators of effective and
sustainable assessment systems. We sought to advance this through an evidencebased understanding of the factors which influence staff as they design and manage
assessment, and the factors which influence first-year students as they attempt to
navigate through relatively unfamiliar learning contexts and assessment tasks. The
project had a set of conceptually and practically related goals:

mapping the first-year assessment system from the perspective of academic,
professional staff and student voices, and using these insights to:

develop a theoretical framework to guide practical strategies for
effectively facilitating commencing students’ success with assessment

develop protocols to enable both staff and students to critically selfreflect on the factors that help or hinder their positive engagement.
The project particularly sought to address the significant issue of enhancing
commencing students’ capacity to self-regulate through the lifecycle of their
early/first university assessment tasks. It is argued that this not only lays the
foundation for more effective study strategies and learning outcomes and
contributes to student persistence, but also, contributes to the broader outcome of
developing the self-management and lifelong learning capacities of graduates.
Process
The organising conceptual framework for this project is that of the assessment
lifecycle (Hounsell et al., (2008). Students’ engagement and performance with
assessment is a complex interaction between learner, task and context. The
process of undertaking a particular assessment task can be mapped as a series of
related sub-tasks for students (see Figure 1), and this is supported by a related set
of intervention choice-points for academic staff (see Figure 2).
From the student perspective ‘doing assessment’ requires them to ‘make sense’ of
tasks based on a combination of their prior experience with similar tasks and the
information and support provided with the current task. This is both a cognitive and
affective process and how students are supported through the lifecycle will have
implications for both their efficacy as learners and their engagement and
performance with assessment tasks. The present project seeks to provide insights
into both the staff and student experience through the lifecycle and to identify the
key strategies, interventions and attitudes that facilitate student success and
satisfaction.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
8
8. Students
feed-forward
their learning
to future
tasks
1. Students
prior
experience
with
assessment
2. Students
initially
appraise the
assessment
task
3. Students
progressively
engage with
the task
7. Students
may seek
academic
recovery or
help
6. Students
appraise both
performance
and self
5. Students
receive
feedback on
their
performance
4. Students
undertake or
submit the
task
Figure 1 The assessment lifecycle: Student perspective
……another part that concerns me about uni is the
overwhelming feeling I have of always trying to keep on top
of my readings and absorb the content. It’s just another
whole level to high school and it’s like playing catch up and
there just aren’t hours in the week to complete the work
that’s set. I am not the type of person who walks away from
hard work. I’m here at uni now. I did feel like a small fish in
a large sea, but I don’t want to leave. I just feel that I need
some help.
Aimee (Medical Science Student)
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
9
8. Facilitate
feed-forward
to future
assessment
tasks
1. Monitor the
implications of
students’ prior
assessment
experience
7. Provide
academic
outreach and
recovery to
at-risk
students
6. Facilitate
students’
understanding
and use of
feedback
2. Frame the
assessment
task and cue
student selfregulation
3. Engage &
progressively
enable
students with
the
assessment
task
5. Provide
useable and
empowering
feedback to
students
4. Establish a
success
enabling
submission
culture
Figure 2 The assessment lifecycle: Staff perspective
I think some students have never had anyone ask them how they
are going or if they need help and some of them are really
surprised when they get asked that. …especially first-years…I
don’t know where they’ve come from. I don’t know what they
know, how much help they need…. I always check. I never
assume that they know anything, and I think they are often scared
and surprised that they are asked if they need help, and it takes
them a while to actually let you see that they can’t quite do it or
they don’t quite understand.
Melanie (Nursing Lecturer)
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
10
1.
The Student Perspective
Understanding Commencing Students’ Appraisals of
Assessment
Context
Early academic experiences have been identified as critical to the formation of
tentative learner identities and self-efficacy (Christie, Tett, Cree, Hounsell &
McCune, 2008). Clearly, ‘assessment backwash’ (Biggs, 1996), whereby badly
designed or organised assessment can unintentionally also harm or impair students’
learning, is more likely with a commencing student population. Indeed poorly
matched and managed assessment is arguably a major contributor to the
phenomenon of premature ‘student burnout’ (viz., feelings of exhaustion and
incompetence and a sense of cynicism and detachment) (Schaufeli et al., 2002) and
disengagement.
Distinguishing between our educational intentions (however worthy) and their impact
on students is a foundational educational discipline. This requires us to more closely
examine the ‘hidden curriculum’ (Snyder, 1971) of our assessment practices. If we
want to understand and evaluate our learning environments we need to authentically
understand how students experience them. Thus, if our aspirations are to influence
students towards deeper learning and higher-order skill development, then a
prerequisite task is to appreciate students’ perceptions of the assessment tasks with
which we ask them to engage.
From a positive perspective, first-year learning environments potentially provide our
greatest opportunities to not only align our educational intentions and impact, but
also, to work collaboratively with new students to develop an evidence-based culture
of success. An empirically supported understanding of the design and process
elements of our ‘assessment systems’ can potentially make a contribution to the
important questions of student engagement and retention.
Purpose
This phase of the project focused on understanding how commencing students
evaluated their early assessment tasks at university. The focal questions for this
aspect of the project were:
 How do first-year students make sense of assessment?
 What factors do they nominate as helping or hindering their success?
Process
The methodology involved the use of structured focus groups and individual
interviews of students from a range of disciplines at key stages across the semester.
Depending on the nature of their assessment task students were interviewed either
twice (beginning & end) or three times (beginning, middle & end) across the
semester. One hundred and thirty students participated in the focus group
discussions and 25 were individually interviewed. The process targeted students’
experiences across the lifecycle of a range of assessment tasks (e.g., essays,
laboratory reports, exams, oral presentations) in a range of disciplines (e.g., Medical
Science, Public Health, Nursing, Psychology, Law, Human Services). A wide range
of assessment tasks were selected to ensure that the findings could be generalised
more broadly to first year assessment. Discussions were recorded and transcripts
analysed for themes.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
11
Outcomes
Analysis of students’ accounts of their experiences at the ‘front-end’ of the
assessment lifecycle revealed a number of meta-themes in the way they evaluated
an assessment task. Students’ firstly described a range of factors related to their
prior experiences that influenced how they initially responded to set assessment
tasks:
 Familiarly or novelty (Have I seen this type of assessment before?)
 Assumptions (What do I think is involved or being assessed with this type of
assessment?)
 Established habits (What is my default approach to learning and assessment?)
 Felt Capability (Do I feel that I have the skills to do this?)
 Self-regulation (To what extent am I waiting to be prompted and organised by my
teachers?)
One of the implications of increasing student diversity is a need for greater
awareness of what students ‘bring with them’ to university learning and assessment.
Some assessment modes (e.g., exams, oral presentations) may be relatively
familiar to a school-leaver population, but less so to students entering university
from other pathways. Lack of familiarity or task novelty seems to be a stimulus for
anxiety (e.g., if I’ve done this type of thing before I feel more confident. If I haven’t
then I may worry a bit more). However just because a student has done something
like this before doesn’t guarantee a better chance of success. Prior experience can
also result in misconceptions about the purposes of assessment. For example, the
notion that multiple choice exams only test facts is still commonly entertained by
students. Students also bring their established habits (both good and bad) for
preparing for assessment (e.g., last minute cramming, writing without editing or
redrafting), and strategies that may have worked in less demanding contexts may
not generalize to university-level assessment. Perhaps most fundamentally, the
extent to which students expect to ‘be managed’ or ‘to self-manage’ required tasks
is key for when and how they will independently engage with set assessment tasks.
Further along the assessment lifecycle when students have more information about
a specific assessment task they describe an additional set of evaluative
dimensions, that they use to appraise an assessment task. These themes or
concerns appear to be generic to commencing students’ perceptions across a range
of assessment modes, and appear to influence both ‘how they approach’ and how
they feel’ about a particular task. We have expressed these themes in a ‘question
format’, as this appears to capture the underlying student process of ‘interrogating
the task and themselves’.





Stakes (How important is this assessment task?)
Motivation (Do I care about this task?)
Capacity (Can I do this?)
Justice (Do I think this is fair?)
Support (What’s the deal?)
Each of these meta-themes or dimensions was composed of a set of related subthemes. Students were readily able to describe sets of issues which contributed to
their overall judgments of what made an assessment task demanding, interesting,
doable and fair.
Stakes: How important is this assessment task?
This dimension appeared to summarize a set of student questions about “what was
at stake?” with a particular task. Students described a range of concerns and
curiosities about personal and institutional agendas, particularly around the potential
consequences of success and failure. Commencing students attribute considerable
personal and academic meaning to their relative success with assessment. Once
again, unclear expectations and low academic efficacy can amplify these issues.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
12




Weighting of assessment task (How will this task influence my overall grade?)
Personal Agendas (What do I want to prove to myself with this task?)
Symbolic Agendas (What will success or failure on this task signify for me?)
Perceived Institutional Agendas (How do I think the university will use this task:
sorting or helping us?)
 Felt Safety (What for me are the risks with this task?)
 Timing (When do I think this task is best done or has to be done?)
Motivation: Do I care about this assessment task?
The extent to which assessment tasks were ‘interesting and engaging’ (or not the
case) was of particular importance to students. Students identified contextual
influences (e.g., the extent to which a task made sense in terms of their
expectations or was congruent with their perceptions of the purpose of a course),
design influences (e.g., the perceived relevance of or learning outcomes from a
task), and the teacher’s relationship with the task (e.g., level of engagement) as
contributing to their sense of motivation.
 Matching Expectations (Is this the type of assessment task I was expecting?)
 Perceived Alignment (Can I see how this task lines up with course goals or what
we are being taught?)
 Perceived Relevance (Can I see how this task will develop my academic or
workplace skills?)
 Felt Interest (Is this personally interesting to me?)
 Teacher Interest (Do you seem excited about it and tell us why?)
 Teacher Authority (Do you tell us to get on with it?)
 Engagement (Can I be bothered with any form of assessment at all?)
Capacity and capability: Can I do this?
Students were also concerned to work out the demands of an assessment task
(‘what this task will require of me’) and the type and level of investment (‘what it will
take to succeed’). Students related these considerations to their sense of task
efficacy.







Depth (How much learning or thinking is demanded?)
Challenge (How much of a stretch is this going to be for me?)
Standards (Do I know what a ‘good quality’ outcome looks like?)
Scoping (Am I able to judge how much work is required?)
Clarity (Do I know what is expected?)
Competing demands (What else is on my plate?)
Efficacy (Do I think I can do this?)
Sense of justice: Do I think this is fair?
Perceived fairness was particularly salient to students’ perceptions of both the
substantive and procedural validity of an assessment task. A sense of social justice
and ‘fair treatment’ is central to most peoples’ experience and, given the importance
attributed to assessment (viz., assessment defines the curriculum), students are no
exception. Students identified aspects of both the design and management of the
assessment process that informed their sense of fairness of what they were being
asked to do.
 Distributive/Outcome justice (Does this task give me a fair opportunity to
demonstrate my knowledge or ability?)
 Procedural justice (Is this task organised and managed fairly?)
 Interactive justice (Are there opportunities for correction or progressive
checking?)
 Control (Does this task allow sufficient personal control over how well I perform?)
 Value (How well does the weighting of this task reflect the work involved?)
 Trust and Integrity (Is this task ‘game able’ or can people ‘get away with things’?)
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
13
Support and guidance: What’s the deal?
Students were also particularly clear about their needs for adequate informational
and support systems so that they could ‘do their job’ (viz., be successful with
learning and assessment). Students were particularly clear that university teachers
gave mixed and confusing messages about ‘being independent’, and that for many
first-year students ‘working independently’ was a premature and unrealistic
expectation. In this sense, most students viewed ‘becoming a self-regulating learner’
as a legitimate and necessary goal, but one that required more initial scaffolding
than was often provided.




Clarity (Are the ‘rules of the assessment game’ clear?)
Independence (What type and level of self-regulation is required?)
Guidance (What formal information mechanisms are in place?)
Relationships (Do we feel like we can talk to you if we have questions or
problems?)
 Perceived culture (Do you seem to care if we do or don’t succeed?)
 Scaffolding (How do we check if we are on the right track?)
 Resource availability (Do we have the tools to do the job?)
The emotional dimensions of assessment
Questions of identity, success and failure and belonging raised by performance on
an assessment task guarantee an emotional dimension to the commencing student
experience of ‘being evaluated’. An analysis of commencing students’
‘emotional language’ contained in the transcripts not only confirmed both the
validity of the evaluative dimensions described above, but also revealed the
underlying ‘feeling landscape’ of assessment (see Figure 3).
Students were mostly able to differentiate whether any challenge they were
experiencing was attributable to their own issues or to the management of their
course. The first dimension of students’ emotional experience with early
assessment can be understood in terms of the contrasting outcomes of personal
success or personal struggle. These are the feelings that are associated with a
personal sense of efficacy (I can do this) or inadequacy (I’m not sure if I’m up to
this). The second dimension of students’ emotional experience reflects their sense
of motivation and engagement with the task. Students describe positive states of
‘enthusiasm’ and ‘feeling like I’m doing something useful’ from undertaking engaging
tasks, and, contrastingly, either an over-confident state of under-investment (viz., it’ll
be right/easy) or a lack of motivation which can either be as a result of the task itself
(boring) or their own state of mind (I just can’t get with it). The third dimension of
students’ emotional experience clearly reflects their sense of the type and level of
support provided with the task. When support matched students’ sense of
appropriateness and fairness they described feelings of trust and safety. However
when students experienced a mismatch between expectations and enactment, they
responded with either righteous other-directed feelings (anger, resentment,
disappointment) or negative self-directed responses (helpless).
I had no idea what a laboratory report was or how to write one! I
believed that everyone else in the class understood the task but
me. I felt lost and cried. Yet I forced myself to ask my peers how
they were going and to my amazement they too were feeling
uncertain. Together we approached the tutor…..
Sharon (Psychology Student)
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
14
Unmotivated
Overconfidence
Comfortzone
Anger
Frustration
Resentment
Helpless
Disappointed
Judged
Boredom
Slackness
Who cares!
Personal
Success
Coping
Enduring
Grinding
Surviving
Confidence
Pride
Optimism
Satisfaction
Safety
Gratitude
Trust
Valued
Calm
Fair Systemic
Support
Perceived Lack
of Systemic
Support
Personal
Struggle
Anxiety
Stress
Confusion
Pressure
Shame
Embarrassed
Guilt
Inadequacy
Excitement
Enthusiasm
Useful
Fun
Purpose
Motivated
Figure 3 First-year students’ emotional responses to assessment
It is interesting to observe just how often students’ emotional responses could be
understood in terms of the interaction of the dimensions students used to appraise
or make sense of their assessment tasks. In particular, the sense of ‘high stakes’
early assessment (viz., highly weighted or very demanding) in combination with the
relative presence or absence of other assessment system elements, precipitated a
range of negative or self-defeating responses:
 I don’t know what you want
High stakes task + ambiguous expectations = Anxious coping
 I don’t get this but I have to suck it up
High stakes task – perceived relevance = Surface compliance
 I don’t think you care
High stakes task – support - sense of control = Anger/frustration
 I get there but it costs me
High stakes task + sense of capability – support = Stressful success
At the same time students did not describe ‘low stakes’ tasks as necessarily positive
experiences:
 I don’t care
Low stakes task - motivation = Apathy
 I’m bored
Low stakes task + high support = Early unrealistic/fragile success
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
15
Thus a key design challenge for early assessment is finding the right balance
between challenge and support. Students’ academic efficacy and engagement
can be conceptualised as a state of ‘manageable demand’ – sufficient challenge to
stretch, matched by appropriately structured support and encouragement. It would
appear that not only should commencing students have a sense of early success,
but importantly, that they attribute that success to their own legitimate efforts:
 I can do this
Moderate stakes task + negotiable support + encouragement = Legitimate
and robust success
Getting this design balance right with early assessment may also make a positive
contribution to the quality and extent of students’ overall engagement and success
at university.
Implications for practice
There are number of ‘good practice’ implications emerging from this analysis of firstyear students’ perceptions of assessment. First and foremost, ‘good practice’ with
diverse commencing students requires us to appreciate and embrace that
enhancing students’ well-being and belonging is an equally legitimate educational
goal to facilitating their learning. Indeed for many students ‘how they feel’ and ‘what
and how they learn’ are much more closely related than we may appreciate. The
focal question is not just ‘what type of assessment’ but ‘what type of assessment
system’ are students experiencing on both cognitive and affective levels. Thus,
good practice requires a balanced concern with the impact of both assessment
content and assessment process on student learning and satisfaction.
The Impact of Commencing Students’ Appraisals of
Assessment
Context
This next phase of the project sought to confirm the previously identified factors that
students’ use to appraise or evaluate an assessment task and to better understand
the consequences of their perceptions for their subsequent motivation and
performance. An evidence-based understanding of the processes that influence
students’ engagement with assessment is particularly important for informing our
educational practice with first-year or commencing students who are relatively
unfamiliar with the culture and context of university-level assessment.
Purpose
The purpose of this investigation was to contribute to our understanding of the
aspects of assessment that influence first-year students’ engagement, confidence
and learning outcomes. While the first phase of this project identified a number of
design and process factors that may be particularly salient to students, there is a
need for the structure of these to be more clearly identified and their relative impact
on first-year students’ efficacy and performance to be confirmed. Thus the focal
questions are:
 What are the general dimensions which first-year students use to evaluate
assessment tasks?
 How do first-year students’ appraisals influence their sense of efficacy,
engagement and actual performance on assessment tasks?
 What are the implications of these insights for the design and management of
assessment?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
16
Process
Two hundred and fifty seven first-year students across five disciplinary programs
Medical Science, Nursing, Psychology, Human Services and Social Work and Public
Health participated in a reflective survey of their experience of first semester
assessment. Students were asked to ‘Reflect back on your first semester of
university study and to recapture the experience of ‘being new to it all’‘. Recall your
early thoughts and feelings about the assessment tasks you had to complete”.
Students were then asked to select one type of assessment task (exam, essay or
laboratory report) and to use the scales provided to “honestly tell us how you
remember thinking and feeling as you approached this task”. The survey was based
on the six dimensions (viz., prior experience, stakes, motivation, capacity, justice
and support) identified by first-year students in the first phase of this project.
Students also rated their efficacy, anxiety and engagement with specific assessment
tasks.
Outcomes
What are the general dimensions which first-year students use to evaluate
assessment tasks?
Students responses were factor analysed to establish if there was a useful simple
structure to their evaluation of assessment tasks. This analysis demonstrated that
first-year students’ reliably perceived assessment tasks in terms of two general
dimensions or factors: assessment content and structure, and assessment
process and management. First-year students’ perceptions of the content and
structure of an assessment task was defined by four themes: the perceived
academic stakes of the task (how important is it to do this well?), its level of
cognitive demand (what will it take me to do this?), the motivational value of the task
(do I want to do this?), and students’ sense of task capability (can I do this?).
First-year students’ perceptions of the process and management of an assessment
task was defined by five themes: fairness (how fair is this task?), support (who can
help with this task?), self-protection (how safe is this task?), self-determination (is
this in my hands?) and interest (will I enjoy this task?).
Overall, commencing students appear to focus on the two higher-order dimensions
of content (viz., what is this task?) and process (viz., how is it being managed?) in
making sense of assessment tasks. On a practical level, staff can translate this as a
dual concern with effective design and effective management.
How do first-year students’ appraisals influence their sense of efficacy, engagement
and actual performance on assessment tasks?
Structural Equation modelling (SEM) analyses were conducted to test the
contribution of students’ appraisals of assessment tasks content and process to their
sense of efficacy and engagement and their actual outcomes on the task. The first
‘general-level analysis’ tested the relationship of the set of predictor variables to
students’ performance on all types of assessment tasks (exam, essay and
laboratory report).
Students’ perceptions of the motivational value or content of assessment tasks
significantly positively predicted their level of task engagement (viz., wanting to learn
and do well with the task) (see Figure 4). Students appear to be describing a pattern
of engagement whereby ‘good academic behaviour’ (viz., wanting to learn and do
well) is facilitated where:
 they experience a level of challenging expectations (learning)
 are convinced of an assessment tasks value (skill development)
 where they feel the task fits with the learning objectives of a course (alignment).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
17
Perceived
Assessment
Process
Student Task
Efficacy
Perceived
Assessment
Value
Student Task
Engagement
Figure 4 Influence of perceived assessment characteristics on students’
engagement and performance
Students’ perceptions of the process of assessment significantly positively
predicted their sense of task efficacy. Students appear to be describing a pattern of
academic self-belief whereby their academic self-confidence (viz., I can do this task
well and with minimal anxiety) is facilitated where:
 they experience the task as being at the ‘right level’ for first-year
 perceive appropriate support to be available
 the task to be weighted fairly for the work involved
 they are able to accurately judge the workload involved.
In this regard, students are making a clear association between the task processes
(viz., the more clear, fair, supported, and in-control they feel) and their sense of
personal efficacy. This is certainly consistent with previous findings where
constructive task-related interpersonal support has been found to encourage selfdetermined motivation (Hardre & Reeve, 2003). This pattern of findings generally
confirms the impact of assessment on students’ confidence and motivation. Beyond
this, how well assessment tasks are designed and managed, while both important
priorities, affect different aspects of the students’ experience. While the above
analysis provides a level of insight as to the ‘general conceptual model’, it is also
important to understand how these processes function with specific assessment
tasks. Separate analyses were conducted to test relationships between first-year
students’ perceptions and approaches and assessment outcomes for three sub-sets
of the overall sample: an essay, laboratory report and closed-book exam task.
While first-year students’ perceptions of exam and laboratory report based
assessment tasks were similar to that described in the ‘general model’, they
reported a different pattern of association with their experience of essay-based
tasks. Commencing students’ perceptions of the assessment process (viz., fairness,
support) was a strong positive predictor of both their essay writing efficacy and
engagement. Interestingly, students’ level engagement with both exam and lab
report based tasks predicted their actual mark, but this was not the case with essaybased tasks. What might be different about commencing students’ perceptions of
these tasks that would produce these contrasting relationships?
Why might essay tasks be most problematic for first-year students? Students,
particularly commencing students, have varied and often contradictory conceptions
of academic essay writing and have considerable difficulty in developing their
conceptions of essay writing and understanding expected disciplinary discourses
(Hounsell, 1984; McCune, 2004). Focus group feedback from students also
indicated that the help and guidance provided by their tutors was often ‘too
advanced’ and assumed that ‘they knew things that they didn’t’. Students reported
frustration with terms such as ‘critical analysis’ which appeared open to broad
interpretation, and beyond this, generally feeling under skilled to do the task
required.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
18
Thus, university-level essays are ‘new territory’ with ‘hard to learn rules’ and are
perhaps significantly more challenging and inherently ambiguous than insiders who
are ‘comfortable in the discourse’ may expect or intend. Unfortunately, unlike other
more accessible assessment tasks, students’ best intentions and efforts (viz., higher
task engagement) were not routinely reflected in higher grades. This suggests that
considerably more attention needs to be given to student preparation and
scaffolding for essay-based tasks. The apparent disconnect between reported effort
and result with essay tasks may be particularly discouraging for commencing
students, and this suggests a need for not only quality feedback but also active
debriefing and reflection to enable students to ‘make the links’ between ‘what they
did’ and the ‘result they got’.
Implications for practice
What are the implications of these insights for the design and management of
assessment?
This phase of the project confirmed the dimensions that first-year students use to
appraise their assessment tasks. In terms of assessment task design students are
particularly sensitive to the scope, weighting and performance demands of a task, its
motivational potential and their sense of its ‘fit’ with their current academic skills. In
terms of assessment task management students are particularly aware of the
perceived fairness of a task (as judged by appropriate weighting, organization and
safety) and the provision of support.
Both the content and process of an assessment task influence the student
experience, but they do so in quite different ways. Assessment tasks that are
perceived to be designed with ‘appropriate content’ appear to positively influence
students’ engagement, and assessment tasks that are perceived to be ‘appropriately
managed’ appear to reduce students’ anxiety and increase their self-confidence.
This provides an evidence-base to reinforce the dual practice goals of engaging
design and enabling support.
If students are shown clearly the requirements of an
assessment they would be less likely to feel
anxious……when I am anxious or unsure I tend to
procrastinate……. which just makes things worse…….. I
know that ultimately it’s my responsibility whether I do
the work or not, but you would be surprised how far a
little bit of help goes in getting us moving.
Chris (Education Student)
Motivating First-Year students with Assessment
Context
One of the key dimensions that emerged from students’ accounts was the
importance they attached to ‘being and feeling motivated’ to study and often just
how difficult this was for either personal or systemic reasons. The question of
‘whose responsibility is it to facilitate student motivation?’ is of course, quite
contested. For some students it’s the teachers’ job to ‘make it interesting enough’,
and if something is ‘boring’ it is ‘the teachers fault’. Contrastingly, for some staff it’s
the students’ job to ‘motivate themselves’ and if they don’t ‘get interested’ then this
has nothing to do with the design of the course or the nature of the assessment.
Clearly, neither of these ‘exclusivist positions’ are realistic or useful.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
19
Purpose
This phase of the project sought to advance our understanding of how to better
engage commencing students with assessment. The focal questions were:
 What are the range of attitudes and strategies that staff report using to engage
and motivate first-year students with assessment?
 How do first-year students respond to different motivational strategies?
 What are the implications of these insights for the design and management of
assessment?
Process
The initial stage of the methodology involved interviewing a sample of 25 academic
staff from diverse disciplines who were involved in the design and management of
first-year courses. Staff were asked to describe the type of assessment tasks they
set, their rationale for these and their perceptions of ‘what worked’ with students’
around assessment. Transcripts were analysed for key themes. The second stage
involved 350 first-year students completing an online survey to evaluate the
motivational potential of these strategies.
Outcomes
Academic staff described a wide range of strategies that they employed for
motivating students with assessment (see Table 1). There was also considerable
variability across academics as to the extent to which they were prepared to go in
motivating or engaging students. This is a theme which will be picked up in detail in
Section 2.
I know staff would like us to be more motivated with some of
this stuff…but honestly we can’t see the point of a lot of what
you tell us…are we missing something?
Adrian (Business Student)
Table 1 Domain of assessment motivational strategies employed by academic staff
teaching commencing students
Motivational
Strategy
Future positive
relevance
Illustrative Description
You might not see it now, but….there will be a future payoff, this
will be useful to you later in the course/degree/when you are
working.
Future
negative
relevance
You need to ‘get this’ now otherwise you are going to run into
difficulties later, some students think they can skip this stuff but it
catches up with them
Present
challenge
If students are not challenged they won’t take it seriously enough,
if it’s ‘too easy’ or they ‘do well’ students can ‘slacken off’, get
overconfident or concentrate on other courses instead
Authoritative
expectations
I expect you to do this, it’s simply required. I expect you to put in
the effort. When we were students we just did what we were told –
we didn’t think of saying to the lecturer “why are we doing this?’,
Give students clear boundaries and expectations so they know
what has to be done and what is/isn’t negotiable.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
20
Investment
Students have to ‘earn their pass’ - need to scaffold to
‘substantive’ not ‘soft’ success, don’t want to give students a
false sense of security of an artificial sense of ‘how much work
is required’, assessment should be graded-if its pass/recycle or
pass/fail it doesn’t seem fair because it doesn’t reward ort
encourage effort, too many chances (e.g., to sit supplementary
exams) breeds student welfare mentality.
Personal
enthusiasm
Show them how interested or excited you are by the material,
our intrinsic motivation is contagious, stimulate their curiosity.
Relationships
Talk to them, show them that you are interested and are happy
to discuss things, being approachable and available.
Contextualising
This is how this assessment task relates to/fits with what we are
learning/course objectives, this is our reason/rationale for this
type of task.
Relevance
Get students to personally apply/relate the task (to themselves,
their lives, their experience), do something real or practical.
Contribution
Set tasks that have some meaning or significance, when
students feel that they are contributing.
Fun
Make it a fun activity, put some thought into making it enjoyable.
Choice
Give students a chance to choose a topic or approach to a
topic.
Collaboration
Get students to work in groups/pairs so they can help each
other.
Feedback
Give students an idea of how they are improving, acknowledge
their efforts, give recognition.
Support
Provide opportunities for ‘early success’, don’t make the bar too
high
Scaffolding
Work through examples of the task with students, discussing the
criteria with students, helping students plan
Matching
Getting the assessment task at the right level for students (not
too easy or too hard)
Vicarious
learning
Let me tell you about how previous students in this course said
and did with this task, this is what is students have said late that
they had wished they had done differently.
Accepting failure
There are some students who don’t do anything and are
determined to fail, some students just have too much on, no
matter what you say it won’t matter to some
Acknowledging
instrumentality
Whatever we value we should assess or grade in some way, we
need to show or signify what we think is important, attach marks
to anything you want students to do, learn or experience.
First-year students evaluated this set of assessment strategies for their ‘motivational
potential’ (viz., how motivating they found them to be) and using factor analysis
students evaluations were clustered into three broad factors or dimensions. Firstyear students appear to understand assessment motivation in three broad
categories:
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
21
1. Enabling Management of Assessment
Students clustered a set of management strategies that enabled them to
constructively and progressively engage with an assessment task. Students
associated the motivational potential of task scaffolding (e.g., working through
previous examples of an assessment task, providing opportunities for students to
get the skills they need to complete a task), positive and formative conversation
(e.g., teacher communicating positive expectations of success, teachers available
and approachable to talk to students) and efficient procedures (e.g., assessment
tasks that are clear and well-organised).
2. Engaging Design of Assessment
Students clustered a set of design qualities of assessment tasks that produced
valued learning outcomes. Students associated the motivational potential of
intellectual challenge (e.g., assessment tasks that challenge students to think and
learn), personal relevance (e.g., tasks that involve skills that will be useful to you
personally), academic relevance(e.g., tasks that involve skills that will be useful to
you later in your course/degree), professional relevance (e.g., tasks that involve
skills that will be useful in your future career), and teacher enthusiasm (e.g., teacher
trying to stimulate students’ interest in or curiosity about an assessment task).
3. Teacher Authority
Students clustered a set of teacher behaviours that focused on assertively
communicating the ‘rules of the game’. Students associated the motivational
potential of teachers clearly and firmly communicating expectations (e.g.,
communicating expected standards to students, being explicit about the required
investment to succeed in a task), consequences (e.g., teacher communicating the
dangers of not fully engaging in an assessment task) and locus of responsibility
(e.g., independence - it’s your choice whether or not you do it).
This categorization of strategies provides a useful basis for better understanding
the general ‘motivational set’ that first-year students bring to assessment. However
students may differ in the value they place on these strategies. The next analysis
aimed to identify if first-year students’ approaches to learning (viz., whether students
who emphasized understanding (deep approach), doing well (achieving approach)
or getting by (surface approach) (Biggs, 1996) influenced the extent to which they
found each of these types of strategies (enabling management, enabling design and
teacher authority) to be more or less motivating. Structural Equation modelling
(SEM) analyses revealed that first-year students’ approaches to learning influenced
their valuing of these three approaches to motivation (see Figure 5).
First-year students’ approaches to learning clearly influenced the motivational
value they placed on each of these sets of strategies. Students who reported a
deep approach to study (viz., a focus on meaning and understanding) were most
strongly motivated by assessment that was designed to be intellectually challenging
and authentic. The factors of enabling management and teacher authority were
motivating but to a lesser extent than the nature of the assessment task itself.
Students who reported an achieving approach to study were less motivated by the
nature of the task, and were more concerned with the management and support
processes provided and clear teacher expectations. This motivational pattern is
consistent with focusing on ‘what’s required to do well’, whatever the task. Students
who reported a surface approach to study (e.g., a focus on reproducing facts) were
not particularly motivated by either teacher expectations or enabling support
processes, and reported intellectually engaging assessment tasks to be somewhat
less motivating, and perhaps even de-motivating. This motivational pattern is
consistent with a student mindset of ‘what’s the minimum I need to do here to get
through’. This particular pattern of surface engagement clearly presents challenges
for staff who ‘go to the bother’ of designing stimulating assessment tasks, providing
scaffolded support mechanisms and being clear in their expectations. What might be
a way forward?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
22
If indeed a deep approach to study (viz., wanting to understand the material)
positively influences students to respond to well-designed assessment and utilize
opportunities for scaffolded learning, then it would seem that the logical question is:
What might influence first year students to adopt deeper approaches to
learning?
Understanding how to positively influence this dynamic requires a shift from a micro
level of analysis (focus on the motivating features of a particular assessment task) to
a macro (focus on the characteristics of the learning environment) level. There are
a number of factors that have been found to influence students either towards
surface (viz., perceived high workloads, emphasis on memorization) or deep (viz.,
good teaching) learning processes (Lizzio, Wilson & Simons, 2002). However, in
the present case we identified that enhancing students’ motivation and engagement
with specific assessment tasks requires us firstly to consider student’s overall level
of motivation and engagement with their degree program. We have previously
identified student’s ‘sense of purpose’ (viz., the extent to which they feel that they
have made the right degree choice and can see that it will deliver the career/life
outcomes they want) to be particularly influential to their satisfaction and persistence
with university study (Lizzio, 2006). Our present analysis demonstrates that firstyear students with a stronger sense of purpose are more likely to report a deeper
approach to their studies and in turn be motivated by well-designed assessment
tasks. There appears to be a positive cascade effect with students’ macro-level
motivation and engagement (viz., sense of purpose) positively influencing their
engagement with micro-level learning and assessment tasks (see Figure 6).
Enabling
Assessment
Management
++
Deep
Approach
to Study
+++
Engaging
Assessment
Design
+
Teacher
Authority
+
Achieving
Approach
to Study
Enabling
Assessment
Management
Engaging
Assessment
Design
+
Teacher
Authority
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
23
Enabling
Assessment
Management
Engaging
Assessment
Design
Surface
Approach
To Study
Teacher
Authority
Figure 5 The relationship of students’ deep, surface and achieving study
approaches to their engagement with assessment.
Enabling
Assessment
Management
Achieving
Approach
++
+
+++
Sense of
Purpose
+++
Deep
Approach
Engaging
Assessment
Design
+
-Surface
Approach
Teacher
Authority
Figure 6 The relationship of students’ sense of purpose to their approaches to study
and engagement with assessment.
The next logical question is, of course, what can we do to enhance first-year
students’ sense of purpose? Who is responsible for motivation and purpose?
Traditionally ‘student motivation’ has been construed as an almost exclusively
within-student process (viz., it’s up to them whether they want do or don’t want to do
this). There is some degree of staff resentment about having to ‘motivate as well as
teach’ the current generation of students and to be required to make connections or
explicate pathways that appear to be patently obvious or well signposted (but
perhaps only to the experienced or initiated). One of the critical next steps is to
legitimate purpose-building as part of the curriculum and to position it as a valuable
educational resource best facilitated through mutual responsibility and contribution.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
24
A student’s sense of purpose is dynamic and changeable. Most importantly a
sense of purpose is not just something that resides within a student or that they
arrive with fully formed, but rather it is most certainly an interactive and emerging
construct. Purpose can be conceptualised as the experienced ‘sense of fit’ or
congruence between person and environment or more specifically between an
individuals’ and an organisations’/institutions’ goals (Schneider, Goldstein & Smith,
1995). A sense of purpose or fit is fundamentally a subjective and experiential
process (Kirstoff-Brown, Zimmerman & Johnson, 2005). For example, it doesn’t
matter that objectively a degree will eventually deliver the vocational outcomes that
a student may desire, if they don’t think or feel that it will right now, because they are
less likely to stay to find out later to see if it does deliver.
We have gathered data from a number of sources (e.g., open-ended responses to
institutional surveys and follow-up focus group discussions) with the goal of better
understanding the ways in which students gain and lose a sense of purpose in their
early university experience. Students’ sense-making efforts and challenges can be
categorised into four domains each with unique threats and opportunities (see
Figure 7).
Life System
How does ‘being at uni’
fit with my life and the
people in my life?
University System
How does this uni
experience in itself make
sense to me?
Investment
How do I test if there
is sufficient return on
my investment?
Current Identity
How does this
experience fit with who
and where I am now?
Aspirational Identity
How does this
experience fit with where
I want to go?
Figure 7 Domains of commencing student identity and purpose
Students commented, both implicitly and explicitly, on their sense of identity and
how studying at university stretches their identities in various ways. Many students
demonstrated a degree of insight into the fact that strong motivation and sense of
purpose are the more visible facets of an underlying student identity that ‘makes
sense’ to them. For example, sense of purpose is more likely to be strengthened if
an aspirational identity (a claimed future self) is validated or legitimated by staff and
mentors. Students are more likely to feel purposeful if their life system (e.g., friends
and family) do not discount their aspirations. Similarly, students report greater
purpose and motivation if staff (university system) actively ‘explain and engage’ in
the business of student-centred sense-making. In this regard, students’ accounts
often reflect that purpose and identity are in a state of dynamic flux as they manage
tensions and tradeoffs and deal with ambiguity.
Student feedback also indicated the types of activities that they considered would
help them become more motivated and purposeful in their engagement with
university. Some examples include:
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
25

Sense-making narratives: Students consistently comment on the lack of
narrative in the way academics describe degree programs. Too often we talk to
our student in a language of course lists and program structures at the expense
of a unifying coherent student-centred storyline.

Relevance: Students, not surprisingly, comment that they are more likely to
engage if they can see the relevance of things. Establishing personal relevance
(rather than assuming an inherent appreciation of disciplinary relevance),
particularly for younger students, is a necessary investment. Scaffolding
motivation (until disciplinary socialisation kicks in) is key to purpose building.

Accessible role models: Students want to talk with and listen to the stories
and experiences of fellow travellers ‘who have gone before them’. Most
importantly these role models have to be accessible (i.e., within aspirational
arms length). Thus peer mentors and early career role models are particularly
valuable early in the lifecycle. High status professionals need to be used
judiciously.

Meaningful work and contribution: Students are acutely aware of the
perceived value (or otherwise) of the learning tasks we set them. ‘Active,
practical and useful’ seem to characterize the preference of many students.

Active testing and reflection: Students are often not sure of their emerging
identities and consistently revisit the underlying question “Is this right for me?”
They value opportunities to put these issues on the table in a safe and
supportive context.

Lifecycle progressive and cumulative activities: Students have a very clear
sense that ‘things change over time’ and that they would benefit from different
experiences at different stages of their degree trajectory.
Implications for practice
This phase of the project has focused on the challenge of motivating students to
engage in assessment. Supporting students to undertake assessment tasks is
important, but more fundamentally, finding ways to stimulate students to invest in
tasks and to activate their self-regulation to set, persist with, and achieve academic
goals is the higher-order agenda for effective practice. On a practical level this
phase of the project has developed an evidence-based typology of assessment
motivation academic staff can use for purposes of self-reflection or be
incorporated in staff development. It may also serve a useful purpose as a selfreflection tool in discussions with students. The findings regarding the
relationships between students’ sense of purpose, approaches to learning and
assessment motivation are particularly informative in the design and management of
assessment systems.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
26
Let me tell you how I ended up at University……. halfway through
Grade twelve I thought I would like to be a doctor but this was an
empty statement because I didn’t know what entry score was
needed. It was then that I decided that if I was going to study
Medicine I am going to have to put more effort into my study. Not
having received the entry score I needed I thought I would try
hairdressing …….after a year I found that my heart wasn’t into
this so I looked into university courses that I could apply for.
……..I decided to study Arts and Education and I had a month
break before starting the degree. During this time my boyfriend
had an accident and being around the hospital environment and
talking to nurses I decided to transfer to a Nursing
degree……….while in my first practice working in a hospital I
realized that I didn’t like some of the responsibilities……..I have
decided that if I don’t like practice I am going to leave the course
and enrol back into Education or maybe Psychology.
Alexandra (Nursing Student)
Helping First-Year Students Develop a Sense of Purpose
The important contribution of students’ sense of purpose to their overall approach to
and engagement with assessment tasks suggests the need for a more detailed
description of the rage of potential strategies that we may use to ‘strengthen
purpose’. Three clusters of purpose-building strategies are:
 facilitating a sense of program coherence
 facilitating a sense of vocational direction
 facilitating personal development.
1. Facilitating a Sense of Program Coherence
Horizontal links: Student’s sense of their whole degree may require some
scaffolding. Student’s common first appraisal of their university learning experience
is somewhat atomistic or reductionistic (viz., I’m ‘doing a bunch of courses).
Establishing the horizontal connections between concurrent courses (viz., how
courses complement each other) may help build students’ sense of coherence.
Vertical links: If a first-year course is foundational for a stream or major then it will
be helpful for students to understand the links across the years. This might be in the
form of a simple graphic that maps the course pathways, and perhaps, if there are
electives, a brief description of future choices.
Navigation beacons: Students benefit from knowing where they are going. It can
be helpful to commence each class (lecture and tutorial) with an indication of the
learning outcome or capabilities being targeted.
Learning Trails: Students benefit from knowing the direction. It can be helpful to
signpost the ‘conceptual trail’ from week to week and class to class. Thus, simple
path finding strategies (e.g., providing an overview of the purpose of a class,
identifying how this class relates to the previous weeks class and providing an
advance link to the following weeks class) can reassure anxieties, help students
keep focus, and reinforce to them the coherent and cumulative development of their
skills and knowledge.
Achievement milestones: Students benefit from knowing where they have been. It
can be helpful to summarize at regular intervals the learning outcomes or
capabilities that have been covered.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
27
Deliberate redundancy: Don’t be afraid of repetition. If something is important it
will need to be said more than once. As per the classic maxim: Tell them, tell them
what you have told them and then tell them again. Thus, it wouldn’t be ‘overkill’ if
‘first year attributes/ capacities’ were linked to the content of each course in the first
week of semester.
2. Facilitating a Sense of Vocational Direction
Students bring a complex set of motivations to their study of a particular degree. In
part they are motivated by intrinsic factors (viz., an inherent interest in a field), and in
part, by extrinsic reasons (viz., a focus on practical career benefits). As academics
we often hope that our students share the same level of intrinsic interest in the field
that we have made our life’s work and perhaps undervalue the instrumental
questions that students bring. (e.g., what will this degree give me? how will it
change my life and career prospects? what will I get as a return on the investment
of my time, money and effort?). We know from research on students’ perceptions of
assessment and learning tasks that perceived vocational relevance (viz., the more
students saw a task as being relevant to future career the more motivated they were
to learn) is the strongest motivator for student engagement. Helping students
develop a sense of vocational direction and relevance in the first year (including
the first semester) is a key contributor to an overall sense of purpose and
persistence, including retention into second year.
Students feel confused about the relevance of whole courses. They
don’t understand why I am learning this in first-year, they don’t
understand the foundational elements of first-year and they say
things like I came here to study Psychology so why do I have to
study statistics. Students in Business degrees say I am going to be
an Accountant, I not going into Marketing, so why do I have to
study it…I am never going to use it so why do I have to study it.
They don’t get the links between what they are studying now and
the future…how could they if we don’t help them.
Laura (Student Counsellor)
The following strategies each contribute in different but complementary ways to
building students’ sense of vocational direction:
Establishing relevance: There is an unspoken but nevertheless important
question on the mind of many commencing students in the first weeks of every
course: Why do we have to learn this? There are a number of ways to answer this
question: Put the question to the class and ask them to respond, present the firstyear attributes/capacities for the program and relate these to the particular course,
or provide cases or stories that implicitly respond to the issue of relevance and
motivation. More authentically, assessment tasks that ‘speak to vocational
relevance’ are a currency that students find particularly engaging.
Future Payoff: Students benefit from knowing how the capabilities that they are
being asked to learn now will be useful in the future. Providing realistic scenarios or
case studies that ‘showcase’ ‘knowledge in action’ is a useful way of building a
sense of relevance and purpose.
Return on Investment: Students benefit from appreciating how their lives might be
‘changed for the better’ from earning a university degree. Attending university
represents a significant investment for many students. It is an act of faith,
particularly for students who are first in their family to attend university, that this will
be a worthwhile investment.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
28
Contribution: Students benefit from knowing how they might ‘make a difference’ in
the world through their chosen profession. This might be achieved through
disciplinary/professionally relevant stories or exemplars of innovation, change or
contribution.
Professional Role Socialisation: Students benefit from understanding and
practicing the implicit or tacit expectations of their future professional roles and
contexts. Students are sensitive to the language we use and the expectations we
hold of them. In part, they will construct an identity based on the role labels used in
a degree program. Thus, for example, some professional programs ‘bring the
profession into the academy’ by asking students to start the process of constructing
their future professional identities (e.g., using terms such as “student-nurse”). In less
vocational specific programs a similar identity transformation may be achieved
through general role labels such as ‘emerging professional’ or ‘professional-intraining’. For optimal impact, this approach would be consistently employed by all
academic staff in a program.
Career planning: Students benefit from being put in the driver’s seat of their
careers right from the start. Practical activities include: career information and
planning workshops; CV building advice; and guest speakers and/or senior student
mentors sharing their career stories.
Employment information: Students benefit from being given practical information
about types of future job options they will have. This can be communicated within
individual courses, or provided through co-curricular career seminars.
Accessible Role Models: Students benefit from hearing the stories of ‘fellow
travellers’ who are further along the path, but not too far as to have forgotten what
it’s like to be a beginner. Role modelling comes in various guises: early career
professionals as guest lecturers, academic staff appropriately discussing their
careers and professional experiences, and senior students sharing their experiences
and aspirations.
Personal relevance: Students benefit from relating the curriculum to their own
lives. This can be achieved by providing opportunities for students to apply
information, knowledge, and skills to themselves and their own situations. A simple
experiential learning cycle (viz., experience, reflection, theorise and apply) may be a
helpful scaffold.
Active Testing and Reflection: Students benefit from opportunities to reflect on
their choices. Inviting students to progressively evaluate throughout the first
semester the extent to which their degree selection and courses of study are “feeling
right” for them helps to build sense of purpose.
3. Facilitating Personal Development
Self-managed learning: Providing opportunities for students to realistically assess
their skills and capabilities and develop meaningful learning plans. This can be
achieved by providing relevant self-assessment exercises in lectures and tutorials.
Encouragement: Providing opportunities for students to broaden their thinking
about the role of university to include growth and development as a person, as well
as a professional. This can be achieved by facilitating class discussions in lectures
and tutorials which challenge ideas and attitudes, and discussion of some of the
Griffith Graduate Attributes.
Extra curricular participation: Providing opportunities for students to be aware of
and to make use of opportunities for social and recreational activity outside of the
classroom.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
29
After school I choose uni as a ‘follow the crowd’ type move
because that’s what the majority of people from school did………
I am unsure what I want to do with my life but having an interest in
maths and physics led me to choose an Engineering degree. I am
not sure that I have put enough thought into choosing the right
course for me and maybe I should have taken a gap year before
coming to uni.
Alex (Engineering Student)
Facilitating First-Year Students Seeking and Finding Help
Context
What do we think of students who ‘don’t seem to get it’? How do we respond when
students ‘ask us for help’? Is it possible to ‘help them all’? One of the recurring
themes in the present project was the multiple and simultaneous ‘learning
curves’ that commencing students reported experiencing:
 learning the language and rules of their discipline
 learning how to be a university student
 learning to balance work-life-study.
Successful students negotiate these various trajectories and, not surprisingly,
‘finding the help they need when they need it’ is a key part of that success. Less
successful students often describe ‘problems’ they experience in ‘learning the ropes’
and often are much less skilful in the business of seeking and finding help. This can
be particularly the case with students who are first-in-family to attend university who
may have much less access to various forms of social and academic capital than
second-generation students.
From both a practical and theoretical perspective ‘help-seeking’ is increasingly
regarded as less a sign of dependence and more an indication that a person is
demonstrating meta-cognitive awareness of the demands of a task and their current
capacities (Wood & Wood, 1999). Of course, not all ways of seeking help are
equally functional, nor are the various forms of help we may provide optimal for
scaffolding students towards confident independence.
Help-seeking is a particularly salient and contested issue around assessment. Both
staff and students alike struggle with persistent questions such as: How much help
to give? To whom? When? How to ask for it? How to minimize the need for it?
Purpose
This phase of the project sought to advance our understanding of the factors that
may help or hinder students when they require help. The focal questions were:
 What are the perceptions of both staff and students as to how students’
attitudes, behaviour and skills contribute to an effective or ineffective help
system?
 What are the perceptions of both staff and students as to how staff attitudes,
behaviour and skills contribute to an effective or ineffective help system?
 What are the perceptions of both staff and students as to the contribution of
systems factors (viz., course design, culture and management) to an effective
or ineffective help system?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
30
Process
Interviews were conducted with staff and first-year students as to the factors (e.g.,
behaviours, attitudes, circumstances, characteristics) that influenced (viz., helped or
hindered) the ability or willingness of first-year students to seek help, or for staff to
provide effective help could be summarised in terms of three broad clusters:
student factors, staff factors and systems’ factors (see Figure 8).
Student
Factors
Staff Factors
What staff
factors influence
the helpfulness
of a system?
What student
factors influence
the helpfulness
of a system?
Systems’
Factors
What systems’
factors influence
staff and student
help seeking
and providing?
Figure 8 Conceptual overview of factors influencing student help-seeking
and help-finding
Outcomes
Both staff and students identified a broad range of personal, interpersonal and taskrelated factors that might influence first-year students’ ability or motivation to find
appropriate help, generally, and in the specific context of assessment. Many of the
student self-perceived blocks to help-seeking were:
 a lack of awareness (I don’t know the rules)
 confidence (I feel shy)
 concerns about being stigmatized (They will think I’m stupid).
The staff-nominated blocks to effective student help-seeking focused on themes
of:
 strategy (Leaving it until the last minute)
 responsibility (Asking for information that has already been provided elsewhere)
 approachability (We care more than students may think).
The student nominated staff behaviours that strongly influenced their helpseeking focused on themes of:
 assumptions (You think what you say is clear but it’s not as clear you think)
 availability (Be there when you say you will)
 consistency (It’s important for all staff give the same advice/information to
students).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
31
The key systems’ factors that were seen to facilitate help-seeking, help-provision
and help-finding were:
 cultural (establish a safe and approachable course culture)
 organizational (build help and scaffolding into the course and assessment
design)
 capacity-building (use students to help each other).
Table 2 Students’ perceptions of their influence on help-seeking and help-finding
Student Perceptions of Self
Perceived
Process
Permission
Brief Description
Pride
I never have needed help. I don’t like to ask, it’s a matter of pride.
Privacy
Some things are personal. You don’t want staff (or other
students) knowing your business. I like to keep uni separate.
Imposition
I don’t want to be a bother and waste their time- they have got
more important things to do.
Credibility
If I asked for help then I’m not sure that they would take me
seriously after that. They might think I’m not up to it.
Guilt
We are supposed to be adults/independent learners - so I would
feel like I was being immature/going back to school/going
backwards.
Independence
I’d rather ‘give it a go’ myself. However sometimes I waste a lot of
time going down dead ends.
Awareness
Sometimes you don’t even know that you need help until it’s too
late. You often don’t know what you don’t know until you are
actually doing the task.
Anxiety
I make a time to talk but then I have trouble thinking clearly about
what I want to know. Sometimes talking one-on-one with a
lecturer is a bit too intense, it makes the whole thing bigger than I
feel comfortable with.
Shyness
I’m not comfortable talking to people in authority. I know it’s silly
but….
Poor timing
I leave asking to the last minute and then I look bad and feel
stupid and the teacher thinks I’m slack.
Pretending
Staff explain an idea and you ask them to clarify – but you still
don’t understand it the second time - so you pretend that you do otherwise you will look really stupid.
Stigma
If no one else is asking, I don’t want to look like the ‘try hard’ or
the one who ‘doesn’t know stuff’.
Peers
It’s sometimes easier to ask your friends/classmates. Sometimes
it works and sometimes you get the wrong information.
I didn’t know/didn’t think that I could or that it was okay to ask for
help.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
32
Planning
ahead
Sometimes making an appointment feels like too much to organise.
Superior
image
It can make me feel good not to ask even when others are - I know
it’s a mind game, but I feel a bit superior or look like I know what’s
going on - even if I don’t.
Pointless
pessimism
I am doing so badly that asking for help isn’t going to do much
good. Hopeless.
Motivation
I know I should - but I really can’t be bothered. It’s a struggle to get
myself going.
Standards
I only want a pass - so I think what I am doing is good enough for
that.
Students early on don’t’ understand a lot of things that we take for
granted…they don’t even understand that convenors have
consultation times….they don’t understand that they can talk to
them or that they can go back to them and say I need you to go
through this assignment because I don’t understand your
feedback…they don’t get that. I think they need a basic preparatory
course that covers a lot of these things.
Sharon (Student Services Officer)
Table 3 Staff perceptions of students’ processes in help-seeking and help-finding
Staff Perceptions of Students
Process
Return on
effort
Brief Description
We offer additional support or help activities but only a small
number of students take advantage. I wonder if it’s worth it. I refer
them to learning support, but I’m not sure that they attend.
Approach
If students come to me asking for guidance that’s one thing, but I’m
not impressed with the ‘what’s the answer’ approach of some
students, or asking if they should already know the answer.
Equality
I think that you have to keep a relatively level playing field. You don’t
want to be giving some students much more help than others.
Equity
I think if we accept students into university then we have a
responsibility to give them the best chance of succeeding. Students
have different needs and abilities and we have to work with that.
Rule
flexibility
Just how much you are prepared to ‘bend the rules’ for a student in
special circumstances is a key issue. This can be make or break for
many students. I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Expectations
I appreciate that students can get stressed or anxious, but
sometimes their expectation are unrealistic- for example expecting
us to reply to emails within a few hours.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
33
Entitlement
Some students have the attitude ‘we are paying for this’ so you
need to deliver - but I don’t think it’s that simple. You can’t buy
learning.
Feasibility
We have to be realistic, some students just may not be able to do
the work - no matter how much help they get.
Responsibility
If a student emails me about a question that has already been
answered in the lecture - I don’t think it’s fair that I should have to
repeat the answer for him. Where does the responsibility lie?
Volume
I know students leave things to the last minute, but there is only
one of me.
Approachability
Some students think we are some sort of ‘authority figure’ - but
we understand a lot more than they might think - we were
students once ourselves.
Initiative
I am happy to help, but they have to ask.
Positive
behaviour
Some people might think that asking for help is a sign of
weakness or dependency. I don’t, for me it’s a sign that students
are thinking about the material and actually care enough to try
and get it right.
Paradox
Those who most need it are often least likely to ask for it
Table 4 Students’ perceptions of staff influence on help-seeking and help-finding
Student Perceptions of Staff
Process
False clarity
Brief Description
Just because something is written in the course outline doesn’t
mean that it is clear or that there isn’t a need to discuss it. Just
because you think it’s clear doesn’t mean that it is.
Misunderstanding Sometimes staff think you are asking ‘how to do it’ and you get
a funny reaction - but all you want to know is if you are heading
in the right direction or not - that’s all.
Timing
You tell us what you want when you want - not necessarily
when we need it. If you don’t know that by now I’m not going to
tell you.
Assumptions
There is a lot of stuff that staff have been doing for years – but
it’s all new to us. You forget how hard it is to learn a foreign
language
Independence
Staff say ‘you have to be independent at uni’. What does that
mean? It can be very confusing to know how much to do on
your own and when to ask for help.
Impressions
Staff can be a lot more ‘scary’ than you might think you are.
Approachability
I wonder sometimes if some staff ‘act grumpy’ on purpose so
that students will leave them alone.
Availability
There is a lot difference in how available staff are. Some staff
are reliable and other staff aren’t even there when they have
‘office hours’.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
34
Responsiveness
Sometimes the ‘ground rules’ for contacting staff are
unreasonable - saying that emails won’t be answered in less
than five days is unreasonable.
Inconsistency
Some students get a tutor who is helpful and other students, in
the same course, get a tutor who doesn’t care. It isn’t fair.
Old fashioned
Some staff refuse to get up to date with technology.
Repetition
Staff might explain something and you ask for them to clarify
what they mean - but all they do is say exactly the same
words/thing again - which doesn’t help anyone.
Question stopper
The moment that a staff member says something like ‘this is an
easy idea’ or ‘this is fairly basic’ it really puts you off asking
questions.
Permission
I like it when the lecturer tells us the right ways of getting help in
a course, it saves us worrying/guessing.
Anticipation
We don’t know what’s ahead with a piece of assessment. If a
lecturer tells us the problems that students usually have had we
are more likely to get activated
Table 5 System’ factors influencing student help-seeking and help-finding
Systems’ Factors
Strategies
Course
Management
Reasonable
availability
Brief Description
Predictable
structures and
roles
Providing explicit guidance as to sources (If you need help
with…x….then please talk to…y…you can contact them by….z.
If you need help with….a… please talk to…b... you can contact
them by….c).
Teaching team
The management of the teaching team influences the
management of the course. A team that communicates well and
values consistency will be noticed by students.
Course Culture
Norm-setting
and permissiongiving
Normalising
Establishing/negotiating reasonable staff availability and
communication ground rules (e.g., respond to emails within x
working days).
Written ‘success statements’ in course outlines and repeated in
lectures that give students permission to seek help (e.g., we are
here to help you succeed. If you are experiencing some
challenges we would like to know about it. Please let us know
and we can work together to get you back on track).
Actively shape the norms of the classroom. (e.g., people often
think they are the only ones who don’t know something, but I can
guarantee that if one person has a question, there are at least 20
others in the same position) or (there are no dumb questions
here, the only ‘dumb question’ is the one you didn’t ask!).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
35
Reframing
Actively influence the meaning that students place on ‘asking
for help’ (e.g., asking for help doesn’t mean that you aren’t
coping, knowing when you need help and seeking it is a key
part of learning-to-learn and effective professional behaviour).
Educating
Help students distinguish between ‘instrumental help’ (help
me understand this, help me with the ‘next step’ so that I can
keep going) and ‘executive help’ (do it for me, help me get this
out of the way quickly).
Teacher
awareness
Be aware of the ‘relational culture’ (vibe) you are creating in
your classes in terms of its impact on your perceived
approachability and respect for students. Actively model and
reinforce the behaviour you want your students to
demonstrate.
Empathic
understanding
Be appreciative of the personal and emotional dimensions of
help-seeking from the students’ perspective.
Face saving
Offer ways for students to ‘save face’ by asking questions
anonymously (e.g., anonymously posting questions of
discussion boards).
Partnerships
Professional staff
Scaffolding
Scaffolding
Supplemental
support
Feedback Loops
Smart systems
Embedding professional staff (e.g., learning advisors) into the
course to work collaboratively as part of the teaching team.
Working through examples of prior assessment or discussing
marking criteria. Providing formative practice tasks with
feedback. Provide help sheets on common issues.
Offer supplementary tutorials at key times during semester
(e.g., before exams) or with challenging threshold concepts in
a course.
Establishing systems that help teaching teams manage the
volume/load of inquiries (e.g., Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQs).
Proactive
intervention
Find out from tutors the main questions students are asking
and pick these up in the next lecture. Conduct ‘one-minute
assessments’ at the end of lectures to establish where the
class as a whole needs help.
Monitoring
Use in-class and online mini-assessments to progressively
check student mastery of curriculum and adjust emphasis and
pace of instruction.
Formative
evaluation
Establish course management mechanisms (e.g., student
consultation/feedback) and formative evaluation (e.g., midcourse reviews).
Approachability
Facilitating contact
opportunities
Create opportunities for ‘low-buy-in’ opportunistic staff-student
contact (e.g., arriving 5 minutes early before a class or staying
5 minutes after).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
36
Invitations
Peer Processes
Online forums
Provide informal conversation-openers for students (e.g.,
how’s it going? are you going okay? how are you finding the
course?).
Make use of moderated class discussion boards.
Peer processes
Facilitate students establishing informal learning groups or
establish these as part of the course design. Encourage peerhelp norms through class activities (e.g., explain this idea to
the person sitting next to you).
Peer mentoring
Establish formal or informal mentoring by senior students.
Self-directed
learning
Learning systems
Make use of interactive online systems (e.g., intelligent
tutoring systems, computer-assisted instruction) to facilitate
self-help
Implications for practice
Help-seeking is a key element of effective self-regulation. Students who recognise
when they need help or assistance to ‘go to the next level’, and who feel empowered
to do so, are more likely to succeed and feel good about themselves. This phase of
the project has identified a number of within-student factors that may inhibit effective
help-providing, help-seeking and help-finding. These provide a useful template for
student self-reflection and staff initiated discussions with students. Importantly
however, a set of structural and cultural factors which can facilitate student success,
and which are within the control of course convenors have also been identified.
These provide the template for academics to consider the range and effectiveness
of the help-systems that can be purposefully incorporated into course design.
A major characteristic differentiating courses which provide effective and sustainable
assistance to students appears to be fit-for-purpose student-centred help processes
integrated (not bolted-on) into the design of a course. The general questions for
designing a locally appropriate help-system include:
 What are our learning goals for our students in this course? What do we know
about our students’ abilities, resources, expectations and backgrounds? What
are the implications of these for the types and timing of help we may need to
provide?
 What types of help might our students want and need to succeed in this course
(e.g., information, task skilling, encouragement, rule flexibility, recovery,
advocacy, referral, voice)?
 What might be the most effective and efficient sources for each type of help
(e.g., self, peers, professional staff, tutors)?
 What might be the most effective and efficient modes for each type of help
(e.g., general workshops, supplementary classes, in-course consultation, task
specific input/practice, online resources)?
 What might be the most effective and efficient timing for each type of help
(e.g., front-loaded, continuous, just-in-time, on-request)?
 What might be the most effective framing to encourage students to access of
each type of help (e.g., normalization, culture building, etc)?
 What might be the most effective ways of monitoring and adjusting the
effectiveness of help provided to students (e.g., student feedback, focus groups,
uptake, etc)?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
37
Three general points related to effectively supporting student help seeking and
finding:
1. High levels of student help-seeking may equally indicate badly designed
curriculum and assessment as much as limitations in student ability. Thus, a key
educational discipline is privileging ‘system level explanations’ over ‘student level
explanations’ in our analysis of student behaviour in relation to assessment.
Comments such as students are being dependent’ simply label and do not explain
or progress a systematic approach to advancing student success.
2. Facilitating student independence is a valid educational goal, which is, however,
not incompatible with encouraging students to seek appropriate assistance.
Ironically, students may be more likely to become effective and motivated learners
when their learning tasks are well-structured (as opposed to being ambiguous) and
well-matched to their current capabilities.
3. Help-rich’ learning environments do not necessarily ‘create dependence’. Welldesigned help systems have ‘facilitating student self-regulation’ as their meta-goal
and, while providing multiple sources and flexible modes of help, emphasise as their
foundation, purposefully facilitating self-help. It is important to recognise that
‘facilitating students to make use of self-help strategies is not the same as ‘not
offering little if any help’. The former is a process of strategic scaffolding, the latter
is a process of responsibility diluting abdication.
How does one design a help-rich learning environment? Figure 9 provides a
notional outline of a potential hierarchy of help-sources in a course seeking to
encourage progressive learner self-regulation.
Four major ‘system settings’ seem to be important in making the shift to a effective
and sustainable help-system:
Inclusive Partnerships. Coordinating and collaborating to optimize not only the
amount of resourcefulness of a system but also the level of coherence and
consistency of help provided to students. This involves us in a process of ‘deprivatisation’ of our classrooms as well ‘allowing others in’ to shape the student
experience. This has implications for how we involve students in the governance of
our courses, how we lead and manage our teaching teams, and how we engage
with staff in a range of roles (e.g., learning advisors, curriculum consultants,
educational designers).
Systems Thinking. Conceptualising ‘what goes on in a course’ at the level of a
complex system more than the ‘personality of types of individuals’. This requires a
positive bias toward asking questions such as: ‘What is it about the way this course
is designed and managed that influences students to behave in the way they do?’,
and thinking about the ‘course as a whole’ rather than its individual components.
Success enabling Culture. Committing to the higher-order principle of designing,
behaving and relating in such a way as to optimize students’ opportunities for
success. This requires a positive bias toward asking questions such as: What would
be most helpful to our students succeeding? Culture-building exercises at the
beginning of courses can help students appreciate the ‘rules of the game’, increase
their capacity to ‘navigate the system’, and emphasize self-regulation as a valued
goal.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
38
Dialogue and Feedback Mechanisms. Constructing the learning environment so
that there are multiple means and modes for knowing and responding to ‘what’s
going on’ (e.g., how well students are learning the material, what students are
thinking and feeling about the course). This can be thought of as designing and
implementing course-appropriate two-way information systems to gather just-in-time
feedback from various sources about student learning and student satisfaction
related agendas.
Inclusive Partnerships
External
Help:
Referral
Dialogue and
Feedback
Mechanisms
Staff Help:
Responsive and
Intrusive
Success
Enabling Culture
Peer Help:
Formal and Informal
Programmed Help:
Structured and Self-adjusting
Student Self-Help:
Activation of Self-regulation
Systems Thinking
Figure 9 Hierarchy of help sources in a learning environment facilitating self regulated learning
In terms of the priority sources of help that we might provide to our students, if we
hold a higher-order goal of scaffolding students to become self-regulating learners,
then our choices about ‘where and what we invest our energy’ become clearer. As
depicted in Figure 9, the foundation or primary source of help in a sustainable system
is student self-help and the meta-design goal is giving students every opportunity to
help themselves. From this foundation we can then emphasize forms of help that are
‘built-in’ to the design of learning activities or derive from the often underutilized source
of student peers. Internal and external help from individual staff is also available but as
a complement to, not substitute for, the structured and embedded processes. Some
examples of specific activities that would operationalise help at each of these levels
include:
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
39
Self help. This involves a wide range of activities that provide students with the
resources to learn in their own time and pace. The practice questions are: What types
of resources do we provide? (e.g., at a basic level passive/information only resources
such as lecture notes or recordings; worked examples to guide revision or deepen
understanding; homework tasks involving problem solving; interactive online resources
and intelligent tutoring systems, and beyond that, quality feedback that guides selfimprovement). How do we purposefully link these to the rest of the course? (e.g.,
required reading, submission of tasks, presentations to peers). How do we motivate
and enable students to engage in self-help? (e.g., intrinsic, extrinsic (e.g., weighting)
rewards, task prompts, self-assessment, peer assessment). Students are more likely
to engage in self-help and self-directed learning if courses incorporate front-end
processes (e.g., purpose building) that are designed to activate self-regulation.
Programmed Help. This form of help is built-into the learning and teaching process
and allows staff and students to ‘regularly check’ and, if necessary, adjust the pace and
direction of instruction. This can be achieved through the use of classroom assessment
techniques (CATs) (e.g., ‘one-minute tests’, providing revision tasks and supplemental
instruction). More fundamentally, the most useful form of help for students is a welljudged, well-paced and well-aligned curriculum. A course that is ‘crammed’ or ‘content
heavy’, and that ‘moves forward’ each week without checking if students are ‘keeping
up’ is the antithesis of a student-centred self-adjusting learning system.
Peer Help. This can be formal (e.g., using peer tutors as per the PASS model) or
relatively informal (e.g., establishing learning groups), incidental (e.g., providing
opportunities for discussion in class) or community - based (e.g., discussion boards).
Staff Help. This can be responsive (e.g., consultation sessions), intrusive (e.g.,
outreach to students in need), community-based (e.g., moderated discussion boards),
systematic (e.g., feedback summaries to whole class), opportunistic (e.g., chatting to
students) or just-in-time (e.g., linked to major tasks).
External Help. This is available as a ‘safety net’ for students who require a level of
additional assistance above and beyond the norm. Students may access this through
self-referral or staff referral.
The idea of course as learning help-system can also be depicted as a lifecycle over
the timeframe of a semester or teaching period. In this sense ‘help’ and ‘learning’ are
positioned as equivalent ideas (e.g., self-help is self-directed learning. The system is
firstly contextualised and activated through the inclusive leadership of the teaching
team. Front-end processes (viz., establishing an appropriate course culture and
information systems and conducting diagnostic and enabling processes) are
implemented in the early weeks to ‘get students off to a good start’. Programmed and
self-help are the core process and these are complemented and supplemented as
appropriate by peer, staff and external help. Each piece of assessment in a course has
its unique lifecycle or trajectory (viz., from prior experience to feed forward) and each
will need to be managed in the context of the whole course. In this sense a course can
be viewed a set of interlocking lifecycles (see Figure 10).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
40
External Help
Course
Culture and
Relationship
Building
Peer Help
Programmed Help
Course and
Teaching
Team
Leadership
Front-end
Diagnosis
and Front
Loaded Help
Course
Evaluation
and
Improvement
Self-Help
Course
Management
and
Information
systems
Staff Help
Assessment Item 1 Lifecycle 1
Assessment Item 2 Lifecycle
Assessment Item 3 Lifecycle
Figure 10 Help system over the lifecycle of semester
2.
The Academic Staff Perspective
Understanding Academic Staff Perceptions of Assessment
Context
Understanding how commencing students make sense of university assessment will
enable us to help them successfully navigate their way through this formative
academic rite of passage. However the design and management of assessment,
and consequently, the conditions within which students must work, are firmly in the
hands of academic staff. Staff and students are often not ‘on the same page’ when it
comes to assessment, and indeed, research points to a lack of fit or incongruence
between staff and commencing students’ (mis)-conceptions (e.g., what’s involved?
how best to prepare?) and expectations (e.g., what investment is required? what
help is available?) of assessment tasks (Collier & Morgan, 2008). Beyond this, from
the perspective of mapping the first-year assessment system, it is critical to
understand the conceptions, purposes and beliefs which shape the way academics
‘set assessment’ in first-year.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
41
Purpose
This phase of the project focused on better understanding the factors that
influenced academic staff in their design and management of assessment for
first-year students. The focal questions were:
 What do academic staff regard as the purposes of assessment in first-year?
 What working relationships do academic staff seek to establish with first-year
students?
 What are the implications of this for practice?
Process
A diverse cross-disciplinary sample of twenty-five academic staff teaching first-year
courses were individually interviewed regarding their practices with first-year
assessment. Staff were asked to describe their assessment practices, their
rationale and their perceptions of students’ responses. Written transcripts were
content analysed for key themes and dimensions.
Outcomes
Academic staff provided five general categories for the diverse purposes of first-year
assessment. There were clear differences in how academics used assessment
tasks. For some academics using early and regular assessment to ‘get and keep
students on task’ and to ‘send them a message’ about what was required at a
university standard were important managerial goals. Other academics approached
the task of student engagement from a more motivational stance and emphasised
using early assessment to build ‘small successes’ and ‘develop confidence’. The
role of assessment in diagnosing student capabilities was also identified and aligned
with the purpose of providing ‘safety-nets for struggling students. In this sense
assessment was seen to have a developmental purpose. Assessment was also
regarded as being a key vehicle for socializing and inducting students into the
discipline and the student role. Finally, some academics saw the community-building
potential of early assessment tasks to establish working relationships between
students and set the tone for a course (see Table 6).
Table 6 Academics’ conceptions of the purposes of first-year assessment
Purpose
Managing
Task
compliance
Standard
setting
Motivating
Encouraging
Brief Descriptions
Ensuring students are keeping up to date, ‘forcing students to study
and get on task, providing the structure and scaffolding that
students need to ‘keep moving’.
Helping students to ‘lift their game’, giving students a ‘wake-up call’
or ‘reality test’ for what’s expected at university, seeing/proving if
students are ‘up to it’, breaking any bad habits, challenging students
to ‘step up to it’.
Reducing stress and anxiety, confirming to students that they are
‘on the right track’, being non-threatening.
Engaging
Getting students excited and engaged early on, drawing students
into the course.
Efficacybuilding
Giving students an early sense of success, building students’
confidence to do the task, giving students an ‘easily earned little
something’ toward their final mark.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
42
Developing
Diagnosing
Identifying students who are not engaged, identifying students
who are not doing well, providing an early-alert or safety-net.
Gate Keeping
Checking if students possess the assumed knowledge and
starting capabilities for a course, ensuring sound grasp of
foundational knowledge and content.
Feedback
Giving students early or just-in-time feedback on ‘how they are
going’.
Inducting and
learning
Capability
building
Helping students become familiar with academic language and
practices, starting to develop skills that students will need for the
rest of their degree, preparing for assessment tasks later in
semester.
Student role
socialisation
Helping students to learn-how-to-learn at university, clarifying
expectations and skills of a university student, raising students’
self-awareness of their approaches to learning.
Disciplinary
socialisation
Establishing frameworks that are basic for the discipline, getting
students to ‘start thinking like a……’, challenging any false ideas
or misconceptions that students might have about the discipline or
profession.
Community
building
Climate setting
Relationship
building
Setting the ‘right tone’ for a course, giving students clear
messages about ‘how we do things.
Setting tasks that get students to work together early on,
collaborating with a purpose, using assessment as a vehicle for
staff and students to talk about things and connect around the
task.
These categories can be further organized in a conceptual space to demonstrate the
complementary relationships and possible tensions between academics’
conceptions of the purposes of assessment (see Figure 11).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
43
Developing
Managing
Task
compliance
Standard
setting
Diagnosing
Gatekeeping
Feedback
Motivating
Encouraging
Engaging
Efficacy
Inducting and
learning
Capability
building
Student role
socialization
Disciplinary
socialization
Community
Building
Climate
setting
Relationship
building
Figure 11 Academics’ conceptions of the purposes of first-year assessment
Academic staff can differ quite remarkably in their approaches to assessment. How
academic staff design and manage assessment reflects their underlying perceptions
of the purposes of higher education and their conception of their roles as university
educators. This diversity of views about ‘appropriate assessment’ is clearly
illustrated through the four prototypical academic profiles that were evident in
interviewees’ accounts:

The Nostalgic Enforcer: Assertively focuses on expectations and standards,
ensuring students are accountable, and socialising students within a discipline.
Motivation and engagement are exclusively the students’ responsibility.
Favours closed-book exams and individual tasks. May have unrealistic
expectations of first-year students, make assumptions about their capability and
motivation, and ‘force’ premature independence. Student help-seeking is not
particularly encouraged.

The Course Manager: Efficiently focuses on establishing structure and
procedures to provide a predictable experience for students. Gives some
attention to developing students’ capability through structured exercises. Uses
a range of assessment tasks, but emphasises those that can be efficiently
managed. May create an efficient but ‘arms length’ course culture where
students ‘comply’ more than ‘engage’. Student help-seeking is tolerated.

The Helper: Supportively focuses on issues of risk and vulnerability and on
supporting students who are struggling (‘the outliers’). Places considerable time
and energy on developing strategies such as diagnosing and providing ‘safety
nets’. May favour collaborative assessment tasks. Takes responsibility for
‘motivating students’. May encourage dependence rather than scaffold selfregulation and progressive independence. The concern with helping those who
are failing may lead to confused or loose standards. Student help-seeking is
strongly encouraged.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
44

The Transition Facilitator: Focuses on the processes and relationships of a
learning environment to support student transition. Is likely to consider the role
of design and culture as well as teaching in supporting learning. Establishes
mechanisms to monitor student progress. Evidences a broad repertoire of
assessment purposes (including community-building) and strategically
integrates these around the theme of ‘engaged learning’. Establishes
mechanisms to monitor student progress. May favour reflective and authentic
assessment tasks. May be somewhat over-flexible and responsive. May
frustrate some students with their emphasis on process.
Academic Staff: Working Relationships with First-Year Students
It is evident from the preceding analysis of academics’ conceptions of the purposes
of first-year assessment that these are related to, and informed by, their conceptions
of appropriate working relationships with students. How academics design and
manage their assessment appears to be influenced by their underlying notions of
appropriate roles and relationships with students. Thus we further analysed the
interview transcripts for staff attitudes, stances and behaviours related to the
approaches used to position and relate to commencing students.
Academic staff described five general types of relationship stance with their firstyear students. Academics described their working relationships in terms of their
levels of engagement (disengaged, procedurally engaged and over-engaged) and
their role conception (teacher/manager or facilitator/designer). These are presented
in Table 7 and further organized in a conceptual space to demonstrate the
complementary relationships and possible tensions in Figure 12.
I would probably say that students need to be supported rather
than challenged in first-year. They need to have their hand held
just that little bit more….not everyone agrees though and I’ve had
my knuckles rapped for being too approachable and flexible with
students. To some extent I can see their point about consistency
but……..I think within Schools there need to be a much better
approach to this and look at workloads and expectations of
academic staff. ....otherwise we can unnecessarily get nasty with
each other.
Tony (Health Lecturer)
Table 7 Academic Staff: Working Relationships with First-Year Students
Relationship
Disengaged stance
Detached
Brief Description
I do my teaching as best I can, but I have other priorities.
You need to put strict limits on working with undergraduates,
otherwise it will eat into your time. As academics we teach
disciplinary knowledge, it’s not our role to motivate students
- it’s up to them whether they want to learn it or not.
Undifferentiated
I don’t think teaching first-years is all that different to later
years - students are students. All my classes are really
basically the same. I have been teaching the same way for
years and never had any complaints.
Alienated
To be honest, I’m over it. I don’t have a lot more to give. I
need to conserve and protect myself from students’
demands-there are many more of them than me and more
than I can/want to handle.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
45
Over-engaged
Enmeshed
Procedurally
engaged
Compliant
Delegated
Teacher/manager
Managerial
Directive
Facilitator/designer
Personally engaged
I really try with all my students- they know that I’m there for
them. Its hard work but I care-perhaps too much - but that’s
who I am. Some of my colleagues might say that I’m overresponsible and that I’m going to burn out.
I’m happy to go along with the procedures that our school
has for working with first-years. My courses are consistent
with university policy. We don’t necessarily do ‘anything
special’ but we are consistent with what’s expected.
I think its fine to try and engage with first-year students. I
don’t personally have the time to get that involved, but I
encourage my tutors to do this. They are the friendly and
helpful face of the course.
I focus on keeping things organized, providing clear
information and covering the material.
I think you have ‘give directions’ and ‘tell people clearly what
to do and when to do it’. Students need direction. Someone
has to be in charge.
I am ‘in there’ with my students. I lead by example. I like to
try new things and experiment with different ways of working
the material. Mostly I work on my own and do my own thing.
Collaboratively
engaged
I think we have to ‘work together’ more. I make a genuine
effort to help and seek support from colleagues. We can’t
do this on our own and students get a better outcome if we
coordinate and ‘connect the dots’.
Reflectively engaged
I used to be one of those people who were always trying
something, but I burnt out. I stop and think before
experimenting and afterwards I take time to drill down into
why something worked or didn’t.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
46
Teacher/Manager
Managerial
Directive
Disengaged
Over-engaged
Procedurally
Engaged
Detached
Compliant
Undifferentiated
Enmeshed
Delegated
Alienated
Personally engaged
Collaboratively engaged
Facilitator/Designer
Reflectively engaged
Figure 12 Academic staff: working relationships with first-year students
Implications for Practice
Student engagement is to some extent a function of staff engagement. Students
notice and respond to how we relate to them and how they are positioned in a
course. Thus helping staff become more critically aware of their underlying
conceptions is a legitimate, and perhaps necessary, requirement for enabling the
student engagement and success agenda. The above frameworks or assessment
purpose and working relationships provide the basis for both self-reflection and
structured discussions with staff regarding their approaches to assessment.
However much deeper conversations about values and conceptions may be
required. The analysis of academic transcripts also revealed underlying dialectics
that are reflective of the transition in the sector from a selective towards a more
inclusive higher education system (Trow, 2006), and the increasing focus on
diversity and access (Bradley et al., 2008). There are predictable ‘points of
difference’ in the narratives or stories that academics tell themselves about their role
and purpose and these are practically reflected in their assessment practices (see
Table 8).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
47
Table 8 Contrasting narrative themes in academic conceptions of higher education
Established Conceptions
Emerging Conceptions
Maintaining academic standards
Facilitating social change
Student ability and quality
Student capacity and effort
Student deficit and remediation
Student contribution and opportunity
Focus on equality
Focus on equity and need
Teach the students we want
Teach the students we have
Confused or ambivalent working
relationships with professional staff
Aligned partnerships with professional
staff
These higher-order narrative themes about the ‘purpose of higher education’
strongly inform and influence academic practice. While it may be useful to engage
in conversations at the micro-level about ‘practice enhancement’, macro-level beliefs
quite readily come to the surface. Just as students’ overall sense of purpose
influences their engagement with assessment, so to do academics’ conceptions
about the purpose of higher education (and their perceived roles in this), influence
the style and extent of their engagement with students. Progressing the agenda of
‘improving first-year assessment’ requires a willingness to engage in values-based
dialogue. Key to this is an appreciation that these apparent opposites are not
mutually exclusive (e.g., we need to both maintain academic standards and advance
social inclusion) and that quality practice is based on creative approaches that
resolve apparent tensions. Corridor conversations about the perceived need to
‘dumb down the curriculum’ and ‘drop standards’ so that ‘the students of today’ will
pass, reflect the challenges we face in thinking systematically about the design and
management of learning environments. We cannot honestly talk about ‘student
standards’ without also discussing the standards of the learning environments in
which they are required to work.
Social Darwinist
Culture
High Challenge
Low Support
Disengaged
Culture
Low Challenge
Low support
Supported
Independence
Culture
Scaffolding,
dialogue and
data-driven
engagement
Aspirational
Culture
High Challenge
High Support
Academic Welfare
Culture
Low Challenge
High Support
Figure 13 Conceptual map of first-year cultures
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
48
The values we hold about the purposes of higher education and the appropriate
roles of academics in the transition to university actively influence the types of
cultures we create and maintain in our first-year classes. One simplified way of
conceptualizing the idea of a first-year culture is to describe ‘possible cultures’ as
combinations of levels of challenge and support (see Figure 13).
Five cultural prototypes can be derived within this framework:
1.
Social Darwinist Culture (High Challenge Low Support)
Learning environments that emphasize students ‘proving they are up to it’ and
sorting out the ‘wheat from the chaff’.
Stance: If they are good enough they should be able to succeed without much
help.
2.
Academic Welfare Culture (High Challenge Low Support)
Learning environments that emphasise ‘helping students get through at all
costs’.
Stance: Everyone deserves a degree if they want one.
3.
Aspirational Culture (High Challenge High Support)
Learning environments that emphasise high expectations of students with
matching high levels of support.
Stance: We should demand a lot of each other.
4.
Disengaged Culture (Low Challenge Low Support)
Learning environments that emphasise covering the content required to ‘get
through’ and to ‘cover requirements’.
Stance: Let’s go through the motions and see who’s left standing.
5.
Supported Independence Culture (Appropriate Challenge and Support)
Learning environments that emphasize an integration of challenge and
support towards the goal of progressive independence. Tasks are
progressively scaffolded, data and feedback is collected to understand
students’ needs and abilities and constructive two-way conversation between
staff and students enables engagement. This approach is based on the
recognition that polarised stances (e.g., Social Darwinism and Academic
Welfare) offer little in the way of sophisticated resolution and are neither
effective nor sustainable.
I guess the biggest challenge to us all is having assessments
at an appropriate level for first-year students and being able
to impart an understanding among students about what is
really required…and I find that difficult…… I can tell students
what’s required, but I believe that I need a lot more feedback
from the students to be able to work out if they understand.
You notice there’s some doubt there…..I’d like to have really
good open communication with students.
Andrew (Science Lecturer)
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
49
3.
The Professional Staff Perspective
Understanding Professional Staff Perspectives of
Assessment
Context
Staff in learning support roles have a unique perspective on the student experience
of assessment and may have access to student concerns and behaviours which
may not be readily expressed to academic staff. Beyond this, professional staff play
an increasingly important role in helping students succeed at university, and
understanding the range of ‘working partnerships’ between academic and
professional staff and first-year students is important to a full conceptualisation of
the first-year assessment system.
Purpose
What are the influential issues that professional staff identify in relation to first-year
assessment?
What dynamics exist between professional staff, academics and students in the
assessment process?
What are the experiences and roles of professional staff in the commencing
student assessment system?
Process
A diverse sample (n = 25) of staff in professional support roles (e.g., learning
advisors, student advisors, student counsellors, international student advisors) were
interviewed regarding their perceptions of and practices with first-year assessment.
Written transcripts were content analysed for key themes and dimensions.
Outcomes
Professional staff consistently identified a number of themes around the question
‘what makes assessment difficult for first year students?’ There was a high degree
of consistency between the issues nominated by both students and professional
staff. Assessment tasks that were too complex or made assumptions about
commencing students’ prior knowledge or abilities were not perceived as relevant,
or which were confusing, were strongly identified as recurring issues for students. A
lack of consistency or variety of rules and systems (in particular, multiple referencing
systems) were also nominated as unnecessarily adding to the already high cognitive
load of commencing students (see Table 9).
Professional staff also described a set of commonly experienced study challenges
that they observed with commencing students. These issues (difficulty unpacking
tasks, not knowing when/how to seek help) are readily understood as facets of selfregulated learning and further reinforce the importance of developing the skills and
attitudes of self-regulation in supporting student success (see Table 9).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
50
Table 9 Professional staff descriptions of common issues with first-year assessment tasks
Assessment
Issue
Nature of Task
Illustrative Examples
Assuming that students know/understand what key terms (e.g.,
critically analyse) mean, assessment tasks that assume/require
skills that students don’t have or are yet to master, assessment
tasks that are too complex or demanding too early, unrealistic
expectations of workload, unrealistic expectations of what is
possible within limited word lengths.
Relevance of
Task
Tasks that are not well-related to what is being taught; students
can’t see the point of the task.
Quality of
Instructions
Assessment tasks that are vague and unclear about what is
expected, instructions that are too descriptive, too long or overly
complicated, using different terms (e.g., essay and report) to
mean the same thing/interchangeably, inconsistency between
written instructions and verbal comments by staff, students
confused about colloquial and academic usage of terms (e.g.,
reflection), implicit codes and meanings in disciplinary language
not accessible to students.
Consistency
across courses
Students having to use different referencing systems across
courses, staff using the same term (e.g., reflection) with different
meanings across courses, lack of co-ordination of due dates
across courses.
Marking
Marking criteria/rubrics not matching the task, feedback unclear
or non-existent, students not being able to understand why they
got the mark they did.
Relationships
Availability and accessibility of academic staff.
Table 10 Professional staff descriptions of common study challenges experienced by
commencing students
Assessment
Issue
Illustrative Examples
Engagement
Students not being able to ‘unpack’ the task, not knowing how to
approach/where to begin/how to ‘break-down’ a question.
Help seeking
Students not seeking help soon enough or at the last minute.
Self-regulation
Students getting overwhelmed with managing a lot of tasks, not
planning their semester.
Academic skills
Students having difficulty with basic writing or language skills.
Life challenges
Students leading complex lives that make it challenging to study
consistently.
Dependency
Students with unrealistic expectations of the role of support
services (e.g., just tell me what to do, do it for me).
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
51
As with academic staff members’ conceptions of their role and purpose there were
two contrasting narratives in the accounts of professional staff. On the one hand, an
historical perspective was evident, where some professional staff viewed
themselves as the unacknowledged contributors to student success, serving the
function of compensating for ‘poor academic practice’ and translating ‘academic
foreign language’ for students. Staff with this conception saw themselves as the
holders of students’ anxieties and the keepers of students’ secrets and stories.
These professional staff saw themselves as ‘outsiders’ working on the edge of the
main game. Two patterns of working relationships were evident within this
conception: Territoriality and good cop-bad cop.
The territorial pattern involves both academic and professional staff working
independently with students around learning and assessment issues. Academic
staff are either unaware of, or seen to defensively discount the value or expertise of
professional staff (see Figure 14).
Commencing Students
Professional Staff
Academic Staff
Figure 14 The Territorial Relationship
The good cop-bad cop pattern involves the academic being positioned as the
‘persecutor’ who is perceived to set difficult assessment for students (‘victims’), who
then come to professionals who help or ‘rescue’ them from poor practice (see Figure
15).
Commencing Students
Professional Staff
Academic Staff
Figure 15 The Good Cop-Bad Cop Relationship
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
52
More encouraging was the emerging perspective of a number of professional staff
who were actively embracing a pattern of mutual partnership in their working
relationships with academic staff and students. This group of professional staff was
actively involved in the ‘core business’ of the student experience and were often
embedded into the delivery of courses. From the student perspective the
partnership was real and transparent. In some cases the partnership was
transformative with academic staff inviting professional staff into the course
feedback and quality review process. As one learning advisor aptly put it: “It should
be obvious to the student that the academic and the professional are working
together to provide the best educational experience possible. If they don’t see a
connection between the academic and you, then the value is lost” (see Figure 16).
Commencing Students
Professional Staff
Academic Staff
Figure 16 The Mutual Partnership Relationship
Implications for Practice
The role and contribution of professional staff to student success is rapidly evolving.
The notion of the ‘third-space professional’ is gaining increasing legitimacy and
establishing patterns of work that enable ‘negotiated partnerships’ in the design,
delivery and evaluation of learning and assessment is the next evolutionary step in
practice. Encouragingly, there are a number of positive exemplars of professional
staff working systemically with academic staff (e.g., embedding professional staff as
members of teaching teams; advising academics on assessment practices;
conducting bridging/supplementary programs within courses). Institutions can
facilitate this by moving to more systemic conceptions of learning and the student
experience. Key to this will be the challenge of de-privatizing the classroom and
encouraging more flexible and mainstreamed contributions from staff in a range of
roles.
I’d like to be on the phone with academics every
day……working things through. …..talking about
possibilities…..not everyone returns my calls…… but a lot of
them do…..enough to make a difference.
Vera (Student Learning Advisor)
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
53
4.
Effective and Sustainable Assessment Systems
Enabling Commencing Students through the Assessment Process
The project has investigated the issue of first-year assessment from the
perspectives of commencing students, academic staff and professional staff. While
each of these stakeholder groups identified unique issues, more fundamentally,
there was significant agreement as to the factors likely to facilitate student success.
The converging data from each of these ‘voices’ has been integrated into a
conceptual framework with the aim of systematically mapping effective and
sustainable practice.
The framework is based on the key idea that ‘doing assessment’ is more richly
conceived of as ‘participating in a system’ rather than simply 'performing a task’. If
the meta-aim is to provide students with fit-for-purpose learning experiences, then
effective and sustainable assessment systems require us to:
 honestly self-appraise our underlying assumptions and practices, authentically
manage both the task and relational aspects of the student experience
 sensitively manage both the cognitive and affective aspects of the student
experience
 constructively design assessment protocols rather than just ‘set tasks’
 empathically view the whole process from the student perspective.
Implementing an effective and sustainable assessment system thus requires
attention to a set of related functions (see Figure 17) organized around the higherorder goal of enabling student success.
I was overwhelmed when I received my first university
assessment, a two-thousand word critical review essay.
At high school the criteria for an essay was 500 words
with good spelling and punctuation…..there appeared to
be an assumption that students already knew how to do
this…..but I felt we needed to be taken through how to
structure this assessment….clearer organized help at the
beginning means a lot less time later emailing tutors and
being anxious with other students.
Julianne (Social Work Student)
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
54
Facilitating
Motivation
Help me
engage with the
task
Relating
Functionally
Help me to feel
understood
Facilitating
Process
Help me to
solve problems
Systems
Awareness
Help me by
coordinating
expectations
Task Design
Provide me
with ‘fit for
purpose’ tasks
and roles
Self
Management
Help me by
managing
yourself
Managing
Information
Help me to
understand the
task
Managing
Procedures
Help me to
navigate the
system
Building
Capacity
Help me to be
task capable
Figure 17 Effective and sustainable assessment systems
1.
Core Functions
1.1
Task Design. Provide me with ‘fit for purpose’ tasks and roles
Designing assessment tasks and protocols that are fit-for-purpose (viz., tasks
that provide optimal learning opportunities for a particular group of students in
a particular context.
Purpose. To what extent do we consider a repertoire of assessment
purposes and design our assessment tasks to be fit for a range of contextually
appropriate purposes:
Diagnostic
assessment of student readiness
Transition enabling
assessment to aid transition to and
engagement with university
Formative
assessment for learning
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
55
Learning
assessment as learning
Summative /Evaluative
assessment of learning
Terminal
assessment of capability/mastery
Meta/Reflective
assessment of learning process
Course/Unit Level Alignment. To what extent do we optimally align our
assessment tasks with our course objectives?
Reinforcement. To what extent is there curriculum synergy (viz., tasks are
taught, practiced, assessed and reflected upon)?
Appropriate Complexity. To what extent do we consciously articulate the
appropriate ‘learning level’ or ‘complexity’ of our assessment tasks (e.g., using
Bloom’s Taxonomy, levels of required independence)?
Assumed Knowledge. To what extent do we design assessment with a
conscious understanding of the ‘assumed knowledge’ we expect of students?
Student Roles. To what extent do we consider to use assessment tasks to
position our students in appropriately enriching and empowering roles (e.g.,
investigator, contributor, collaborator)?
Workload. To what extent are our tasks appropriately and feasibly weighted
for the work involved?
Scheduling. To what extent does the timing and spread of tasks facilitate
student learning and success?
Scaffolding. To what extent do we incorporate scaffolding in assessment
design to support student success?
1.2
Systems Awareness. Help me by coordinating expectations
Managing assessment to optimize students’ sense of coherence, consistency
and coordination across a degree program.
Program Level Alignment. To what extent do we align our assessment with
program outcomes and desired graduate capabilities?
Program Level Integration. To what extent is the type, sequence and timing
of assessment tasks conceptualized as an integrated program-level
assessment portfolio?
Program Level Scheduling. To what extent is the type, sequence and timing
of assessment tasks coordinated with other courses?
Program Level Consistency. To what extent is consideration given to
optimizing consistency in staff expectations, requirements and standards of
students across courses?
1.3
Teacher Self-Management. Help me by managing yourself
Addressing personal and systems’ factors that help or hinder effective and
sustainable assessment practice
Simplifying Assumptions. To what extent are we aware of, and check,
assumptions we make about our students?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
56
Knowledge of Students. To what extent do we seek to understand our
students and the ways in which their characteristics and backgrounds may
impact on their assessment performance?
Self-protection. To what extent is our approach to assessment a function of
managing our workload?
Disciplinary Culture. To what extent and in what way is our approach to
assessment constrained by the culture and ‘taken for granted’ assumptions of
our discipline or school?
Personal History. To what extent and in what way is our approach to
assessment influenced by our attitudes to/perceptions of students?
Role Conceptions. To what extent and in what way is our approach to
assessment influenced by our conception of our ‘appropriate role’ as an
academic?
Active Monitoring and Review. To what extent do we engage in regular
data-based review of our assessment practices?
2.
Scaffolding Functions
2.1
Building Capacity. Help me to be task capable
Formative interventions, resources and actions which facilitate students’ sense
of assessment literacy and mastery.
Checking Assumed Knowledge. To what extent do we help students to
assess their ‘prior knowledge’ and provide opportunities for ‘catch up’?
Enabling Skills. To what extent do we help students to develop the enabling
skills for accomplishing assessment tasks (e.g., information search)?
Conceptions and Misconceptions. To what extent do we challenge
students ‘prior habits with’ or ‘assumptions about’ particular types of
assessment tasks?
Scaffolding and Coaching. To what extent do we provide scaffolding,
coaching, practice and feedback opportunities to enhance students’ capability
to undertake assessment tasks?
Peer Help. To what extent do we establish peer systems to increase the
capacity of students to assess their own and each others; work (e.g., selfevaluation, peer feedback)?
Cueing Planning and Self-management. To what extent do we cue
students to self-regulate and plan their approach to assessment tasks?
Socialization. To what extent do we facilitate students’ understanding and
valuing of ‘disciplinary thinking’?
Explicating Quality. To what extent do we facilitate students’ understanding
of and engagement with ‘quality work’ (e.g., discussion of criteria, analysis of
assessment exemplars)?
Self-assessment. To what extent do we facilitate students’ capacity to selfassess the quality of their work/learning?
Peer-assessment. To what extent do we facilitate students’ capacity to
assess the quality of each others’ work/learning?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
57
2.1
Facilitating Motivation. Help me engage with the task
Motivating interventions which facilitate students’ engagement in assessment
tasks.
Overall Sense of Purpose. To what extent do we facilitate our students
overall sense of purpose with their degree program?
Specific Sense of Purpose. To what extent do we establish the relevance
and purpose of our assessment tasks for students (viz., ‘why are you doing
this assessment task? why is it useful?)?
Alignment and Coherence. To what extent do we link assessment tasks to
the learning objectives of our course?
Task Value. To what extent do we establish the applied value of assessment
tasks for students in terms of academic or professional skills?
Task Relevance. To what extent do we link assessment tasks to students’
everyday contexts (e.g., real-world significance, personal interests)?
Teacher Motivation. To what extent do we demonstrate/communicate our
personal interest/enthusiasm for a topic or task?
Task Demand. To what extent do our assessment tasks ‘match and stretch’
our students’ capabilities (viz., not too easy, and not too hard)?
Independence. To what extent do we provide our students with choice of
assessment tasks?
Variety. To what extent do we provide our students with a variety/range of
assessment tasks?
Accountability. To what extent do we establish accountabilities and clearly
contract with our students around expectations and required standards?
Negotiation. To what extent are we prepared to negotiate the form and
content of assessment with our students?
Naming Resistance. To what extent are we prepared to surface and address
students’ disinterest and resistance with assessment tasks?
3.
Task Functions
3.1
Managing Information. Help me to understand the task
Information management interventions which facilitate students’ understanding
of the assessment task.
Systematic Approach. To what extent do we design and manage a
transparent and predictable ‘information system’ around our assessment
tasks?
Range of Information Modes. To what extent do we use a range of
information modes to communicate with students (e.g., written, oral, online)?
Written. To what extent are our ‘written descriptions of assessment tasks’
framed in student-centred language?
Oral/Interactive. To what extent do we provide opportunities for students to
clarify and translate the sub-text of assessment tasks and information?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
58
Online/ Interactive. To what extent do we provide opportunities for students
to engage in online conversation about assessment?
Anticipatory Mode. To what extent do we anticipate students’ needs and
concerns for organized information (e.g., FAQ mechanisms)?
Just-in-time Mode. To what extent do we provide just-in-time information for
students as they progress through an assessment task?
Saturation Mode. To what extent do we provide clear terminal signals to
students regarding the absence of further information? (viz., don’t keep waiting
before you start. You have all the information you need or are going to get.)
Consistency. To what extent do we ensure that information is coordinated
and consistent across sources (e.g., tutors)?
Message Checking. To what extent do we check student’s understanding of
an assessment task?
Focusing. To what extent do we signal ‘what’s important’ to students with
particular assessment tasks? (e.g., I want you to pay particular attention
to….because…).
Rumour Control. To what extent do we manage the student assessment
rumour mill?
Terminology. To what extent do we scrutinize our use of apparently
‘interchangeable terms’ (e.g., essay, report, etc) that may confuse students?
Translation. To what extent do we translate, explain or define academic,
technical or disciplinary language for our students?
3.2
Managing Procedures. Help me navigate the system
Procedural interventions and actions which facilitate students’ (and staff)
sense of predictable, fair, clear and transparent assessment system.
Availability. To what extent do we provide ‘appropriate staff access’ for our
students (e.g., consultation, help-seeking and provision)?
Help Seeking. To what extent do we have a systematic approach to
facilitating student help-seeking and help-finding?
Staff Roles. To what extent do we manage our teaching teams such that the
roles, responsibilities and authorities of respective members are clear and
agreed?
Partnerships. To what extent do we establish functional working
relationships with professional staff (e.g., learning advisors) to advance
student learning?
Academic Integrity. To what extent do we ‘educate and inform’ students
about academic integrity? (e.g., do we provide an ‘ethical rationale’ verses just
‘rule enforcing’?)
Procedural Justice. To what extent do we ‘establish and endorse’
procedurally fair systems for our students (e.g., rights of appeal)?
Rule Boundaries. To what extent are we willing or able to ‘manage rule
boundaries’ to support student success (e.g., special considerations,
negotiation of extensions)?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
59
Managing Peer Process. To what extent do we ‘establish and manage’ fair
and effective procedures to support peer-based assessment tasks? (e.g.,
social loafing, conflict, grey areas such as collaboration v collusion)
4.
Relationship Functions
4.1
Relating Functionally. Help me to feel understood
Cultural attitudes, behaviours and relationship styles which facilitate students’
sense of respectful partnership, intellectual safety and intrinsic motivation.
Student Voice. To what extent do we actively seek to ‘listen and understand’
our students’ needs, opinions and issues?
Non-defensive Communication. To what extent do we non-defensively
invite student feedback or critical discussion on assessment tasks?
Legitimating. To what extent do we actively give permission/encourage our
students to ask questions about assessment tasks?
Encouragement. To what extent do we give students positive feedback,
encouragement or appreciate their efforts with assessment tasks?
Tolerance. To what extent are we patient and non-judgmental of students’
anxieties and perceived limitations?
Reassurance. To what extent do we normalize students’ difficulties and
provide reassurance?
Appropriate Challenge. To what extent do we communicate high
expectations and aspirations to our students?
High Expectations and Feedback. To what extent do we engage our
students in challenging and honest conversation about ‘what they might do
better’?
Assertive Communication. To what extent are we honest and transparent
with our students about what is important to us?
Empowering Students. To what extent do we do we seek to position
students as partners and collaborators in the learning and assessment
process?
Mutual Respect. To what extent is ‘mutual respect’ a conscious and
deliberate aspect of our working relationship with students?
4.2
Facilitating Process. Help me to solve problems
Cultural attitudes and actions which facilitate students, sense of ‘cultural
membership’, collective efficacy and problem-solving.
Responsiveness. To what extent do we make time in our courses for
emerging issues, problems and questions around assessment?
Flexibility. To what extent are we able to be flexible with rules with students
who may be experiencing problems?
Limit Setting. To what extent do we communicate clear understanding of the
allowable limits to flexibility and negotiation?
Feedback Systems. To what extent do we have feedback or early-warning
mechanisms that let us know what is going on?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
60
Norm Setting. To what extent do we negotiate mutual expectations and
ground rules with our students around assessment tasks?
Student Responsibility. To what extent do we position students in
responsible and contributing roles in our courses?
Safety Nets. To what extent are we willing and able to provide academic
recovery processes and support for students who are encountering
difficulties?
Supporting Success Culture. To what extent do we build working
relationships (e.g., staff to student, student to student) within our courses to
support assessment success?
There is a lot of discussion about challenging and supporting
students……but I think fairness is the big idea for students. If
they feel that university is unfair it makes a huge wall for them
to progress on…..if they think something is unfair the next
time they get a similar type of assessment they bring a lot of
negativity towards it. The only way I know if I’m being fair is by
listening to feedback from students and student groups. I don’t
always agree with students’ views but they are receptive to my
disagreeing with them because we are respectfully talking and
listening to each other.
Simon (Psychology Lecturer)
5.
Supporting the Success of At-risk Commencing
Students
Context
Commencing students attribute considerable personal and academic meaning to
their relative success with assessment. Students can use their early assessment
marks to signify their felt capacity for university-level study (can I do this?), inclusion
(do I belong here?) or intelligence (am I smart enough?). Thus, how well students
perform on their early assessment can initiate either a virtuous (building their
confidence) or vicious (decreasing their confidence) academic cycle. Students who
fail, ‘just pass’ or who ‘do worse than expected’ on early assessment are likely to
suffer a loss of confidence, both personal and academic.
More importantly, first year students often do not possess sufficient selfmanagement and problem-solving capacities to adequately understand and recover
from these potentially challenging experiences.
As indicated in the assessment lifecycle model, academic outreach or recovery may
be a particularly strategic intervention for students who experience disappointment
of difficulties as a result of their performance and feedback on early university
assessment.
The traditional approach to helping at-risk students has been direct instruction in
learning skills or study strategies for student groups regarded as needing
remediation or support. There is some evidence to suggest however that when
students ‘learn to self-regulate’ (viz., they have a working understanding of the
issues and tactics required to manage learning tasks) they are better able to persist
in the face of academic challenges. We propose that a just-in-time scaffolding
intervention has significant potential to enhance first-year students’ academic
success following the ‘critical incident’ of receiving feedback on their performance on
assessment tasks in their first semester of university study. Such an intervention
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
61
can be thought of as a form of ‘intrusive advising’ in that help is initially offered in
response to an identified ‘academic crisis’, or at a period where students are more
likely to be responsive because they are engaged with a real problem or a decision
with real consequences.
Purpose
This phase of the project was concerned with interventions designed with the dual
goals of supporting short-term academic recovery of at-risk students and developing
their capabilities for self-regulation around challenging academic tasks. The focal
questions were:
 Can academic recovery interventions facilitate the success of at-risk students?
 What factors might influence the efficacy of this type of intervention?
A key consideration in the use of interventions to support at-risk students is
balancing both effectiveness and efficiency. Thus an additional design question
was:
 How do we design an academic recovery intervention that produces defensible
results while being cost and time efficient for staff, and, importantly, is not too
demanding or intrusive for students?.
Process
Overall Method. Students who failed or marginally passed their first piece of
university assessment were contacted and invited to participate in a two-stage
process: independently completing a reflective workbook (First Assessment First
Feedback) designed to help students understand the reasons for their assessment
performance, followed by a structured consultation with their tutor to identify
improvement goals and strategies (see Figure 18). The intervention was designed
to help commencing students who are experiencing challenges with early university
assessment improve their capacity for academic self-regulation by:
 Better understanding the reasons for their performance on early assessment
(enhancing meta-cognitive awareness)
 Feeling more hopeful that they can ‘take charge and do better’ (strengthening
efficacy and optimism)
 Implementing changes and accessing required assistance (positive action
planning and environmental support)
 Feeling more capable and confident in self-managing their next assessment
task (activating future self-regulation).
The process was designed to both achieve short-term problem solving (viz., getting
back on-track following an early set-back) and, more fundamentally, systematically
helping students learn to self-regulate around assessment tasks.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
62
1. Feedback
Students receive
a ‘less than
hoped for’
assessment
result
5. Supported
Action
Students
implement their
plan of action
4.
Consultation
Students have
a planning
meeting with
their tutor
2. Response
Students
personally
invited to
participate
3. Reflection
Students
complete FAFF
workbook
Figure 18 The First Assessment First Feedback process
Theoretical and Practical Foundations. The conceptual basis for the intervention
is self-regulation theory. Self-regulation can be understood as a set of strategies
that learners can use to control their learning processes (Zimmerman, 2008) and
actively manage their own learning outcomes (Pintrich, 1999). Self-regulation is
particularly required at times of change, stress or transition where a person is
required to respond to new demands and where automatic or routine responses are
not sufficient. Thus self-regulation is particularly salient in higher education contexts
because of the (often implicit) expectation of independence placed upon
commencing students. Academic success requires each student to manage
themselves in the context of their own particular mix of environmental circumstances
and personal capabilities. The process of self-regulation requires students firstly to
make an accurate and realistic appraisal of their circumstances, and from this to set
appropriate goals. Success then depends on students utilising the strategies that
are most likely to achieve their goals and finally to actually put these into action (see
Figure 19). Academic failure may be understood as the breakdown in one or more
of these steps:
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
63
My History as
a Learner
Where have I
come from?
My Expected
Future
Where am I
headed?
1. My
Awareness
What do I
think is
expected?
My Present
Sense of
University
What’s it like for
me here?
4. My
Actions
Do I put my
plans into
action?
2. My
Commitment
What am I
motivated to
do?
3. My
Strategies
Do I study
effectively?
My Present
Circumstances
What’s
happening in my
life?
Figure 19 Conceptual framework for helping commencing students reflect
on their management of assessment
In the first stage, students independently complete a structured workbook (Lizzio
& Wilson, 2007) that is designed to help them to ‘take charge’ of their refection
about the circumstance of their first university assessment task (see Table 11 and
Appendix A). The workbook process functions at two levels: firstly, it provides a
user-friendly guide for assessing and positively responding to their current
challenges; secondly, it is structured to progressively guide students through the
self-regulation cycle:
 awareness (What do I think is expected?),
 commitment (What am I motivated to do?),
 strategies (What do I think is the way to go?) and,
 action (What are practical first steps?).
In this sense, students are practicing the very skills that are more broadly required
for academic and professional success.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
64
Table 11 Structure of the First Assessment First Feedback workbook
Reflective Phases
1 Establishing My Readiness: Students clarify how willing and able they are to
undertake the exercise.
2 Sorting My Current Situation: Students describe 'how they think they are
going' at university and how well this matches their expectations.
3 Understanding My Study Profile: Students systematically evaluate their
unexpected assessment performance across a taxonomy of potential helps and
hindrances to their academic self-regulation and success.
4 Learning from My Feedback: Students review any feedback that may have
been provided on their first piece of assessment.
5 Imagining My Chances of Success: Students consider their level of
confidence and optimism in recovering from this early unexpected experience
with assessment.
6 Setting My Goals: Students identify key goals and strategies that would
increase their chances of success.
7 Planning My Actions: Students work out 'what might get in their way' and how
to put their goals into practical action.
8 Maintaining My Positive Intentions: Students identify ways to stay focused
and on track.
In the second stage students met with their tutor and reviewed their workbook
responses. Given students’ ‘sense of failure’, the tone of the interview was
respectful and supportive. In order to facilitate self-regulation, tutors were instructed
to function less as an ‘expert authority figure’ and more as an ‘enabler of learning’.
Students committed to practical action plans (what do I need to do differently?) and
clarified what sources and types of support (e.g., peers, learning assistance,
family/friends) they might require to maintain their positive intentions (what do I need
to stay on track?).
Outcomes
This academic recovery intervention was implemented and evaluated in a number of
disciplinary and institutional contexts. These are reported in turn, and overall
implications for practice identified.
1.
Health Group Griffith University
Psychology - The First Assessment First Feedback (FAFF) intervention process
was evaluated on two consecutive offerings of a large introductory psychology
course (300 + students). Students who failed (below 50%) or just passed (50 to
55%) their first piece of assessment (a Week 6 multiple choice exam) were
contacted by their tutor via email or phone (in Week 7) and invited to discuss their
results.
Outcome evaluation
Does this self-regulation intervention make a difference to students’ academic
performance? The subsequent academic performance of students who undertook
the intervention was compared to students of similar achievement in the same
courses who were offered the invention but chose not to participate. There was a
consistent pattern of findings across both implementations of the intervention. At-risk
students who undertook the intervention (viz., reflective workbook plus structured
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
65
consultation with tutor) following their first piece of assessment were more likely to
have enhanced academic performance in terms of both task persistence and
achievement than comparable at-risk students who did not. The intervention
improved student task persistence with more students who participated in the
intervention submitting their next piece of assessment (90%) compared to a lower
submission rate of comparable students who did not (78%). There was also an
impact on short-term academic success with 100% of students in the intervention
group who submitted their next assessment item (laboratory report) achieving a
passing grade. In comparison, fewer students in the non-intervention group who
submitted their laboratory report passed the task (88%). Students in the intervention
group also achieved a slightly higher average mark on this assessment item (67% v
60 %). Overall academic success also appears to be positively influenced by the
intervention, with more students who participated in the intervention passing the
course overall (60%) compared to students in the non-intervention group (24%).
Explanatory mechanisms
How do at-risk students make sense of, or understand their underperformance on
early university assessment? Understanding how at-risk students make sense of
their underperformance on early university assessment is particularly useful in
informing intervention strategy. Students endorsed a wide range of factors as
affecting their academic performance, but quite concerningly, students were more
likely to attribute their underperformance on an early piece of university
assessment to a ‘lack of ability’ (I’m not smart enough) ‘ as opposed to a ‘lack
of effort’ (I didn’t work hard enough) or ‘poor choice of strategies’ (I
misunderstood the task). This reinforces the value of interventions which target
students’ attitudes and beliefs about ‘what makes for success’.
Process Evaluation
How did students experience the intervention? Generally speaking, students were
positive in their assessment of both the process and outcomes of the intervention.
Students rated (1 not at all to 7 very) the intervention as producing high levels of
both academic related learning (mean = 5.7, SD = .68) and personal development
(mean = 5.02, SD = .62). Students reported greater insight into the reasons for their
under-performance on assessment (mean = 5.56, SD = .59), and increased efficacy
and optimism for future performance (mean = 5.57, SD =.68). Importantly, given
their at-risk status, students also reported the process itself as non-aversive and
non-threatening (mean = 5.31, SD = .74).
Students’ qualitative comments also identified some of the key underlying task and
socio-emotional mechanisms that may have facilitated enhanced performance and
efficacy. Thus, students described the positive value of:
 feeling normalised (I thought it was only me)
 experiencing positive regard and support (The experience of somebody caring
helped me to feel better about myself)
 cueing help-seeking (I wouldn’t have done anything if you hadn’t reached out)
 the value of scaffolding problem solving and goal setting (I needed this
structure).
Students also described an improved capacity to:
 clearly appraise their academic performance (I have a better sense of all the
things I have to manage) and, in the face of difficulty
 to shift from an anxiety-based orientation to a problem-solving task orientation
(I’m not so likely to lose the plot).
Both of these capabilities are foundational for self-regulation in an academic
context.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
66
2.
Health Group, Griffith University
Disciplines of Nursing and Human Services and Social Work - The FAFF
intervention has also been implemented and evaluated with similar outcomes in
other disciplinary other contexts (Nursing, Human Services) with a relatively high
proportion of at-risk students.
3.
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast
(Dr Anna Potter and Dr Ann Parkinson)
The intervention has also been implemented and evaluated in a large (800 students)
introductory communications course at the University of the Sunshine Coast.
Seventy-three (73%) of students who participated achieved a pass rate or better on
their subsequent assessment item compared to 43% of those who did not
participate. In terms of performance on the course overall, 81% who participated
passed (compare to 51% who didn’t). Students reported significant increases in
motivation and academic confidence and a greater willingness to seek help if
needed.
The success of this pilot program has led to its introduction into six first-year courses
from a range of disciplines across the institution.
4.
University of Western Sydney, School of Engineering (Ms Marnie
Campbell)
The process was trialled in the Bachelor of Engineering and Bachelor of Industrial
Design programs (400 students) in the School of Engineering University of Western
Sydney. The UWS First Year Experience Program is a three-tiered intervention:

Level 1Student Initial Experience survey which cues students to transition
tasks

Level 2 Phone Outreach Students who failed their first piece of assessment
were called and offered guidance by phone

Level 3 Students offered an opportunity to work with their tutor on the FAFF
process.
Of the 130 identified at-risk students, 100 were contacted, 40 counselled by phone
(partial participation), and 30 undertook the complete (viz., workbook plus
consultation) FAFF intervention process.
For the first-year engineering computing course at-risk students who participated in
the FAFF process achieved pass rates (81%) comparable to the whole cohort (84%)
and attrition rates at half of the whole cohort (7.6%).
However for a first-year mathematics course, the pass rate for the at-risk group was
only half that of the whole cohort (15%). This raises issues regarding the limitations
of academic recovery interventions. It was evident from the data that prior academic
background is a strong contributor to student success in technical areas. Thus a
lack of academic grounding in mathematics cannot be compensated for by an
intervention that focuses on strengthening students’ self-management in a very
short time frame. While the FAFF process was seen as valuable in helping
struggling students in this context to ‘pause and reflect’ and ‘take control’ by
interrogating their failure experience, it was not able to scaffold their capacity to
‘think mathematically’. Accordingly, the FAFF program was considered to be most
beneficial for students with low motivation, poor planning or poor self-regulation
skills. Interestingly, almost all participants reported improved levels of academic
confidence, motivation and help-seeking behaviour. A large proportion of students
reported a significant improvement in their ability to understand expectations
regarding work required and academic standards to be successful.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
67
University of Newcastle, Faculty of Business and Law (Dr Kym Cowley)
The process was also implemented in a first-year marketing course in the Faculty of
Business and Law, The University of Newcastle. Students who achieved less than
60 per cent on their first assessment (fail or marginal passing grade) were invited to
participate in Early Assessment Review (EAR) involving a structured consultation
(reflecting on what might have ‘gone wrong’, identifying potential improvements and
planning specific changes) with a tutor. Students who participated had lower failure
rates for the course overall than similar students who did not participate.
Implications for practice
Findings would appear to support the value of offering students active outreach and
academic recovery interventions. Both hard (academic performance and
persistence) and soft (student satisfaction) indicators appear to be positively
influenced by interventions which target students’ self-regulation capabilities. In
terms of sustainability and return on investment, considerable savings (in time,
money and effort) are accrued from the retention of students.
1.
Strategy Generalisability. It is important to recognize not only the potential
value, but also the limitations of academic recovery interventions. The data
suggests that the present intervention is particularly useful when
underperformance is a function of underdeveloped academic self-regulation
processes such as not appreciating expectations of a task, ineffective study
strategies and poor time management. However, the strategy of ‘reflect and
regroup’ does not appear to be effective when:
 Students are fundamentally ‘not coping’ with the substantive content of
the course itself (e.g., an insufficient grounding in science or
mathematics). This requires a stronger focus on preventative strategies
such as curriculum-based bridging courses and supplemental
instruction.
 Students strongly believe that they have ‘made the wrong degree choice’
and have ‘given up entirely’. Students in this situation may be able to be
convinced to persist and subsequently transfer credit. However
sustaining motivation appears to be a significant challenge.
 Student failure is the result of a personal crisis of a size and nature
which requires too steep a recovery path to be feasible. In such cases
advocating on behalf of the student for ‘withdrawal without penalty’ until
circumstances improve, is appropriate.
 Students who have not been attending formal classes or engaging in
formal learning activities are unlikely to be positively influenced by such
an intervention. This pattern of early non-engagement is best addressed
via early monitoring interventions (e.g., keeping attendance logs in
tutorials, patterns of online access) followed up by a ‘how’s it going...we
haven’t seen you’ contact (email or phone call) if attendance is below a
specified minimum threshold.
 Students cannot be contacted. There are a significant proportion of
students who are determinedly ‘hard to contact’, and creative and
assertive forms of outreach may be required to reach them. It is clear
that a significant number of students may have disengaged to the extent
that even active outreach may not be effective.
 Finally, prevention is better than intervention. Poorly designed or
managed assessment increases the risk of failure for commencing
students. Academic recovery interventions should be implemented in
the wider context of reviewing the fitness-for-purpose of the whole firstyear assessment system.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
68
2.
Strategy Selection. In terms of the generalisability of ‘recovery
interventions’ it is important to note that ‘one size does not fit all’. Academic
recovery interventions can be implemented in varying ways and levels of
strength depending on local circumstances and resources. A potential
hierarchy of interventions of increasing strength and focus is presented in
Table 12.
Table 12 Potential hierarchy of academic recovery interventions
Level
Intervention
1
Students responsible for initiating help-seeking without prompting
2
Email communication to all students inviting contact to discuss first
assessment and providing information regarding support services
3
In-class activity discussing first assessment performance and
feedback. Self-regulation cycle guiding discussion and self-reflection.
4
Targeted written communication to students who failed or nearly
failed first assessment inviting contact to discuss first assessment
and providing information regarding support services
5
Self-reflective workbook distributed to students for independent
completion and invitation for follow-up contact
6
Phone call to students who failed or nearly failed first assessment
inviting contact to discuss first assessment and providing information
regarding support services
7
Targeted invitation to students who failed or nearly failed first
assessment inviting participation in structured face-to-face
consultation and planning session with tutor
3.
Strategy Framing. Students appear to be less likely to respond if the
process is described in ‘remedial language’, and more likely to respond if it is
mainstreamed or normalised as part of ‘learning to learn’ and ‘developing
good professional habits of seeking help when you need it’. Describing the
process in the course outline as a ‘success enhancement strategy’ offers the
strongest form of normalisation. Student engagement is enhanced if the
academic recovery process is framed to suit the local disciplinary and
institutional context.
4.
Staff Attitudes. Staff engagement and enthusiasm is fundamental to
student buy-in and participation. These interventions appear to have
optimum effect when mainstreamed into the culture and practice of a
program rather than as extra-curricular activities. Staff attitudes that may
covertly undermine the process need to be openly addressed. Some staff
may believe that such processes ‘give some students an unfair advantage’
or that it’s ‘not their role’ or that it is ‘too much work’.
5.
Strategy Process. The heart of the intervention is a positive student and
staff conversation. An exclusively technical problem-solving focus will be
less effective than an approach that values relationship building. The
optimism of the staff member appears to be critical in enhancing students’
sense of efficacy (viz., if you think I can do it then perhaps I can). Students
are often disorganised and disintegrated and their engagement with the
process can be chaotic and messy. Patience and tolerance for ambiguity are
foundational staff attitudes. Finally, students’ feelings of shame and
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
69
inadequacy are triggered by failure and near-failure experiences (viz., do I
belong here? can I do this?). Staff sensitivity to these underlying concerns
and self-doubts facilitates students’ trust, which, in turn, supports their
openness to developmental feedback.
6.
6.
Strategy Design. While the purpose of ‘academic recovery’ is universal, the
form that this takes will vary depending our local context, goals and
circumstances. The following questions may assist in the design of a
‘locally appropriate’ strategy:
1.
Our Context
What resources and constraints do we have that influence our
intervention strategy?
What courses/units will we be targeting?
Who will be involved?
2.
Our Strategy
What level or strength of intervention will we be implementing?
3.
Our Action Plan
How will we identify our ‘at-risk’ students?
How will we contact them?
What specific help will we offer to them?
How persistent or intrusive can we be in our contact?
4.
Our Implementation
Roles: Who will be doing what?
Resources: What resources and skills do they need?
Awareness: What potential problems do we anticipate?
Marketing: How do we frame/communicate this to our students?
5.
Our Evaluation
How will we judge if this is worthwhile?
What data will we collect?
6.
Our Management
Who is coordinating this exercise?
How are we compensating staff conducting the process?
Who do we contact for support and problem solving?
Talking With Our Students About Assessment
Context
The present project has identified a number of principles and processes that can
usefully inform the design and management of assessment at both the course/unit
and degree program levels. However there is no substitute in our experience for
direct conversation between teacher and student about ‘a particular task in a
particular course’. At the end of the day, a ‘situated understanding’ of student
perceptions and experiences of their specific learning context will not only provide
richer data, but also develop working relationships to support quality improvement.
The integrating framework for this project has been that of the assessment lifecycle:
the journey that both students and staff co-create and co-navigate from prior
experience through to feed-forward. This is outlined from both staff and students’
perspectives in Figures 1 and 2. The notion of an assessment lifecycle also serves
as a useful basis for guiding structured conversations between staff and students
about the impact of our design intentions on students’ learning and satisfaction.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
70
Purpose
The purpose of this process is to identify ways by which staff can systematically
access the student experience and build working relationships to support
improvement of their assessment system. The focal questions are:
 How might staff initiate useful conversations with students about their
perceptions and experience of assessment?
 How might staff use this to generate positive quality improvements?
Process
There are many potential ways to access the student experience, but given the
present necessary dual goals of ‘generating data’ and building relationships’ it is
suggested that ‘conversational methods’ may be most appropriate. Focus groups
are one ‘conversational method’ which are time efficient, enable access to a
diversity of students, require minimal skill to conduct, and offer relatively direct
access to students unmediated views.
Two approaches are possible:
Unstructured groups which start with a broad question or prompt (e.g., tell me
about your experience of assessment in this course) to initiate free-flowing
discussion. This can be supplemented with more refined probe questions (e.g., how
helpful was the feedback?) later in the process.
Structured groups in which discussion is channelled through a set of questions
based on a theoretical framework such as the assessment lifecycle. For staff who
may wish to consider a prospective approach of tracking their students’ experience
over a semester a three-phase protocol is outlined in Figures 20, 21 and 22. The
questions in this protocol are designed to operationalise the predictable issues that
students may encounter at the early stages of an assessment item, during its
completion and submission and post submission.
A few basic considerations in conducting these discussion groups with students:
 Allow about an hour and a half. It will take time for students to warm up to the
task
 Provide students with a set of sample questions before hand to get them
thinking and reassure them of the value of frankness
 Guarantee confidentiality
 Be open and non-defensive. We shouldn’t ask for feedback if we are going to
be ungracious when receiving it. Don’t argue just listen and encourage
 Consider conducting at least two groups to test the level of convergence of
student experience
 Consider the size and composition of groups. About 8-10 students is a good
number to stimulate and maintain conversation. Use smaller groups if you are
feeling less confident
 Emphasise students ‘sharing their experience’ rather than ‘finding agreement’
 Summarize information and feedback to the whole class
 Discuss potential changes
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
71
Students’ Perceptions of Their Learning Context
What have others (e.g., teachers,
students) said about this type of
assessment in the past?
Do you think this assessment task
will be the same or different at
university?
My previous experiences
of this type of assessment
Why do you think this
particular type of assessment
task has been set for this
course?
What do you imagine are the
agendas or goals of staff in
using this type of assessment?
What are other students in your
course saying about this
assessment?
How do you think teaching staff
want you to approach this task?
What to date have staff said so far
about this assessment in this
course?
What clues/cues or messages are
you picking up?
How appropriate or realistic do you
and/or other students feel are the
expectations of staff?
What sources of help/guidance are
available to you with this task?
How likely are you to use of any of
these?
What can staff could do that would
make the most positive difference to
students with this task?
What, if anything, have staff said that
they wont do/help with this task/?
How do you feel about this?
My perceptions of the
assessment in this
particular course
My current intentions with
the assessment in this
course
My current approaches to
the assessment in this
course
Student’s Reported Experience
Have you done this type of
assessment task before?
How familiar/unfamiliar is this type
of assessment to you?
What good/bad habits have you
developed with this or similar types
of assessment?
How do you feel about having
this type of assessment task
in this course?
What are the pros and cons?
How interesting/boring? Why?
How relevant to you?
How might it challenge you?
What concerns/stress/ anxiety
might it provoke for students?
What skills (academic and/or
professional) might students
learn?
How might it be fair or unfair?
What do you think is the best way
for you to prepare for this
assessment task?
What is the gap, if any, between what
staff say and what students think
about this assessment task?
How clear/confusing is what is
expected of you with this task?
What don’t you know that you need to
know about this task? How will that be
helpful to you?
What are the reasons you expect to
do well/not so well with this task?
How do you think you will actually
approach/are approaching this
task?
What are the things that will help or
hinder you succeeding with this?
What are ‘common mistakes’ or pitfalls
that students can make with this task?
To what extent do you currently feel on
task or behind schedule?
What student attitudes or behaviours
around this assessment might be
surprising, shocking or disappointing to
teachers?
Figure 20 Students’ Appraisal of Assessment Tasks: Phase 1 Early in Semester
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
73
Students’ Perceptions of their Learning Context
What have staff been
saying/not saying about this
assessment task as semester
progresses?
How are staff reacting to
students’ concerns or queries?
Do you think that you are getting
clear and consistent messages
about what is expected?
What are other students saying?
What, if anything, have staff
been doing/not doing to help
you prepare for this task as
semester progresses?
How useful is this?
What help do you need that you
aren’t getting?
What help is being offered that
you aren’t using? Why?
What was the feeling in the
course around the time /just
before the due date of this
assessment task?
How were staff
reacting or behaving?
How were other students reacting
or behaving?
What, if anything, did you find
surprising or disappointing?
What was the feeling in the
course just after this
assessment task was
completed?
How were staff and students
reacting or behaving?
What, if anything, did you find
surprising or disappointing?
What, if anything, did you find
refreshing, pleasing or positive?
My evolving perceptions
of assessment in this
particular course
My current approaches
to assessment in this
course
My ‘submitting’ or
‘sitting’ of assessment in
this course
My reflections on ‘how I
did’ with assessment in
this course
Students’ Reported Experience
What have you been feeling
about this assessment task as
the semester progresses?
What, if anything, has changed in
your perceptions of this task?
How interesting/boring?
How relevant?
How challenging?
What concerns/stress/anxiety?
To what extent, as time
progresses, are you gaining or
losing confidence with this task?
How have you been approaching
this task as semester
progresses?
How would you describe:
 your study strategy?
 your motivation?
 your organisation and
management of priorities?
 your confidence?
What is helping/hindering your work
on this task?
To what extent is your approach
consistent with what staff are
expecting you to do?
What do you feel about the
work you submitted or how
you performed in the exam?
What are the reasons you expect
to do well/not so well?
If you did an exam:
How would you describe your
experience of the exam?
Was it what you expected?
How did you approach it?
If you did an assignment:
How would you describe the
quality of your work?
What thought, if any, did you give
to this assessment task just after
it was completed/submitted?
What, if any, was your biggest worry
or disappointment in relation to
yourself?
What, if any, was your most positive
thought in relation to yourself?
How much did you think about it
afterwards verses getting on with
other things? Why or why not?
What were you
thinking/feeling
Figure 21 Students’ appraisal of assessment tasks:
Phase 2 Around Submission
as you handed
it in?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
74
Students’ Perceptions of Their Learning Context
What are other students saying
about their feedback?
What, if anything, has been
discussed about learning from
this task for future
assessment?
What opportunities are there for
you to apply your learning from
this assessment to other tasks?
To what extent do students know
how to use feedback to improve
their future performance?
What advice would you give
staff about using type of
assessment task in the future?
What can staff do that would
make the most positive difference
to students with this task?
What is the key difference
between the aims of assessment
and what it actually achieves?
What would staff be surprised to
hear students say about this?
My perceptions of the
feedback on this
assessment task
My future intentions with
this type of assessment
task
My overall perceptions
of the value of this
assessment task
What was the feeling in the
course after the marks for this
assessment task were
published?
What, if anything, did staff or
other students say?
How did students justify or
explain their results?
How long did students have to
wait for their results?
What type or amount of
feedback on this assessment
task, if any, was provided to
students?
What, if anything, have staff said
and done to help students use
the feedback from this task?
My perceptions of my
marks or results on this
assessment task
Students’ Reported Experience
How did you personally feel
about your performance (viz.,
marks or results) on this piece
of assessment?
In what ways did you feel your
marks were:
 fair or unfair?
 expected or unexpected?
 an indication of your
ability/understanding?
 a wake up call?
What influence, if any, has this
result had on your academic
confidence?
How do you feel about the type
and amount of feedback you have
received on this assessment
task?
What were the useful and unhelpful
aspects, if any, of the feedback you
received?
What would you have liked staff to
do more/less of or do differently?
How likely are you to approach staff
to discuss or clarify their feedback?
Why? Why not?
What, given your experience of
this assessment task, will be
your approach in future?
If you had your time over again
what might you do differently?
What, if anything, have you learnt
about yourself from doing this
assessment task?
What are the common traps and
pitfalls?
What advice would you give
future students about this?
What is your overall feeling about
the value, if any, of this type of
assessment task?
What skills (academic, personal, or
professional), if any, has it helped
you to develop?
How, if at all, has it made you a
better/worse learner?
How has it impacted/influenced your
academic confidence?
What single word or image sums
up your experience of this
assessment task?
Figure 22 Students’ Appraisal of Assessment Tasks: Phase 3 Feedback and Feedforward
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
75
References
Biggs, J. B. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment.
Higher Education, 32, 347-364.
Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of
Australian higher education. Canberra: DEEWR,
Christie, H., Tett, L., Cree, V. E., Hounsell, J. & McCune, V. (2008). ‘A
real rollercoaster of confidence and emotions’: learning to be a university
student. Studies in Higher Education, 33, 567-581.
Collier, P.J. & Morgan, D. L. (2008). “Is that paper really due today?”:
differences in first generation and traditional college students’
understandings of faculty expectations. Higher Education, 55, 425446.
Hardre, P. L. & Reeve, J. (2003). A motivational model of rural students’
intentions to persist in, verses drop out of high school. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 95, 347-356.
Hounsell, D. (1984). Essay planning and essay writing. Higher Education
Research and Development. 3, 13-31.
Hounsell, D., Mc Cune, V., & Hounsell, J. (2008). The quality of guidance
and feedback to students. Higher Education Research and Development.
27, 55-67.
Kirstoff-Brown, A.L., Zimmerman, R.D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005).
Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta analysis of person-job,
person-organisation, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel
Psychology, 58, 281-342.
Lizzio, A. (2006). The Five senses of success: A conceptual framework
for student transition and orientation. Griffith University
Lizzio, A., & Wilson, K. (2007). First Assessment First Feedback: A
Workbook for first year students and their tutors. Griffith University.
Lizzio, A. Wilson, K., & Simons, R. (2002). University students’
perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes:
implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 2751.
Pintrich, P.R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining
self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research,
31, 459-470.
McCune, V. (2004). Development of first-year students’ conceptions of
essay writing. Higher Education, 47, 257-282.
Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I., Marques-Pinto, A., Salanova, M., & Bakker,
A. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students. Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 464-481.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
76
Schneider, B., Goldstein, H. W. & Smith, D. B. (1995). The ASA
framework: An update. Personnel Psychology, 48, 747-773.
Snyder, B. R. (1971). The hidden curriculum, New York, Knopf.
Trow, (2006). Reflections on the Transition from Elite to Mass to
Universal Access: Forms and Phases of Higher Education in Modern
Societies since WWII. International Handbook of Higher Education, in J.
Forest & P. Altbach (Eds.) Volume 18, 243-280 Springer: Dordrecht.
Wood, H., & Wood, D.(1999). Help-seeking, learning and contingent
tutoring. Computers and Education, 33, 153-169.
Zimmerman, B.J. (2008).Investigating self-regulation and motivation:
historical background, methodological developments, and future
prospects. American Education Research Journal, 45, 166-183.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
77
Appendix: Resources to Support Academic Recovery
Intervention
1. Student Workbook
2. Tutor Evaluation
3. Sample Invitation
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
78
FIRST ASSESSMENT- FIRST FEEDBACK
Student Workbook
Helping commencing students respond positively
to their early performance with university
assessment
Alf Lizzio and Keithia Wilson
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
79
FIRST ASSESSMENT- FIRST FEEDBACK
INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS ALL THIS ABOUT?
Welcome! If you are reading this you have probably had a challenging
experience with one of your early pieces of assessment. Perhaps you
didn’t get the result you expected and/or a staff member has approached
you to see if you would like to discuss ‘how you are going at uni’.
It is important to say that your experience is not unusual. Many students
are disappointed or surprised by their early results and often say that they
find the transition to university style assessment very challenging. Our
students also tell us that the key to turning things around is often talking
to ‘someone who has been there before’ so that you can better
understand ‘what is going on’ and ‘what you can do about it’. This
exercise is designed to provide you with a structured opportunity to do
just that!
This is the process we will follow in this exercise:
6. Success
You become a
more confident and
capable student
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
80
FIRST ASSESSMENT- FIRST FEEDBACK
INSTRUCTIONS: WHAT IS INVOLVED?
What will I get out of this exercise?
This process is designed to help you succeed at university by:
 Understanding the reasons for your performance on early assessment
 Implementing changes and accessing assistance
 Feeling more confident and capable as a university student
What choice do I have?
While we strongly encourage you to take advantage of this student service, your
involvement is entirely voluntary and you are under no obligation to participate, nor
will your not participating influence the future grading of your work. If you don’t decide
to participate no explanation is needed.
Who will know about this?
Please be assured that what you discuss with your tutor is entirely confidential. We
respect your privacy.
What will I have to do?
1. You will be invited by a staff member to participate in this process. Most likely
you have ‘failed’ or ‘just passed’ the first piece of assessment in a core course
in your degree program.
2. You will schedule a consultation appointment with your tutor to discuss your
first piece of assessment.
3. You will then complete the first part of this workbook (Sections 1 to 6)
prior to meeting with your tutor. You can read the second part (sections 7
to 10) beforehand but these are best completed as part of the meeting with
your tutor.
4. You will photocopy your completed workbook and bring both copies to your
meeting with your tutor. If you don’t have access to a photocopier or can’t
afford this, don’t worry, your tutor will do this for you.
5. You will meet with your tutor and follow the format outlined in the workbook.
The shaded ‘dialogue boxes’ indicate the types of discussion you can expect
to have with your tutor.
6. You will develop and implement your plan of action.
7. You will arrange support and follow-up to keep yourself on-track.
How much time will this take?
Preparatory Work
You will need to invest approximately 45 -60 minutes to complete the workbook.
Consultation Session
You will meet with your tutor for approximately 30-45 minutes.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
81
1.
MY FOUNDATION: HOW DO I GET OFF TO A GOOD START?
There isn’t much point in investing your time and effort in this exercise unless you think it may
be worthwhile. Please answer the following questions to sort out if you are ready to do this
exercise. Circle the number that best fits how you feel at the moment.
What do I think about this exercise?
I’m too upset about this result at the
moment to think clearly about
problem solving.
I will feel embarrassed discussing my
results with a tutor.
1
4
2
5
3
1
4
2
5
3
I’m far too busy to have much time to
invest in this type of optional
developmental activity.
I think there are some things that I
just can’t learn or change – even if I
wanted to. Either you have it or you
don’t.
I’m concerned that I will be judged
and that I’ll probably end up feeling
bad about myself.
I’m concerned about who will see my
workbook. I don’t know if it will be
confidential.
It’s not my fault that I didn’t do well on
this assessment item
My result was just bad luck
1
4
2
5
3
1
4
2
5
3
1
4
2
5
3
I am reasonably confident that the
focus is on helping not judging me.
1
4
2
5
3
1
4
1
4
1
4
2
5
2
5
2
5
3
I’m certain no one will have access to
my private information unless I give
permission.
I accept some of the responsibility for
how things have turned out
I don’t think luck is very relevant
I prefer to be told what is important to
learn or change rather than having to
sort it out myself.
3
3
I am upset but I know that it is better
to take action sooner rather than
later.
I might feel uncomfortable but I know
that it is in my interests to take help
when it is offered
I am busy, and I’m prepared to adjust
my priorities to “make time” if this
activity can help me.
I think with the right strategy and
effort I can improve – even in areas I
find difficult.
I accept responsibility for managing
my learning. I know that in the end
it’s up to me.
Add your scores to see how ready you are to do this exercise
40 – 45 This is the zone of focused action. I am very clear and focused about the exercise. I
am ready to do it!
35 – 39 This is the zone of positive readiness. I am fairly sure about this exercise. Perhaps
a couple of “grey areas” but probably nothing that will get in the way of success.
30 – 34 This is the zone of cautious readiness. I am sufficiently ready to give the exercise a
go- but I have some concerns or questions. It might be useful to take a moment to see if any
of my concerns need to be addressed before proceeding.
29 or less This is the zone of confusion or concern. I am confused or concerned about
aspects of this exercise. I might discuss my concerns with my tutor. Alternatively I might “give
it a go” but keep an eye on whether it is working for me.
DIALOGUE 1: Establishing a working relationship and contract with your tutor
When you meet with your tutor the first step will be to develop a good working relationship. We want you
to be an equal and informed partner in this process. Some of the topics you might briefly want to discuss
include:
Goals: What do you hope to achieve from this exercise?
Roles & Groundrules: How might you and your tutor work together?
Starting point: Do you have any concerns before proceeding?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
82
2.
MY ASSESSMENT: WHAT IS MY CURRENT SITUATION?
In this section we invite you to describe ‘how you think you are going’ so far at
university. Honestly ‘describing things as they are’ is the very helpful first step to
‘doing something different’. For each question circle the response that is most true for
you at this point in time.
How I am going in this course?
Outcome: How did
you perform on
this first piece of
assessment?
I did not
submit
or sit for it
I clearly
failed
I just
failed
I just
passed
I clearly
passed
Expectations: How
does this result
match with what
you expected
when you finished
it?
I did much
worse than I
expected
I did worse
than I
expected
About what
I expected
I did better
than I
expected
I did much
better than I
expected
Fairness: How
does this result
compare with what
you believe you
deserved?
I did much
worse than I
deserved
I did worse
than I
deserved
About what
I deserved
I did better
than I
deserved
I did much
better than I
deserved
Scope: How are
you performing on
assessment in
your other
courses?
I am
performing
much worse
than in this
course
I am
performing
worse than
in this
course
I am
performing
about the
same as in
this course
I am
performing
better than
in this
course
I am performing
much better
than in this
course
Expectations: How
does your overall
performance so
far compare with
how you expected
to perform at the
beginning of
semester?
I am
performing
much worse
than I
expected
I am
performing
worse than
I expected
I am
performing
at about
what I
expected
I am
performing
better than I
expected
I am performing
much better
than I expected
Fairness: What do
you think about
your overall
performance so
far, given the
effort you
invested?
I am doing
much worse
than I
deserve
I am doing
worse than
I deserve
I am doing
about what I
deserved
I am doing
better than I
deserve
I am doing
much better
than I deserve
How I am going overall in my degree program?
DIALOGUE 2: Discussing your current situation with your tutor
Please discuss ‘how you think you are going’ with your tutor. He/she will try to help you
get a clear and honest sense of where you stand. You might briefly talk about:
Expectations: How well do your results match with what you expected or what you feel
you deserved given the effort you invested?
Reactions: What do you think or feel about this?
Scope: Are you concerned about just this one course or your other courses as well?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
83
3.
MY UNDERSTANDING: WHAT DO I THINK IS GOING ON?
In this section we invite you to try to make sense of your results on this piece of
assessment. The good news is that many students before you have experienced and
overcome similar challenges. Before we are able work out ‘what to do differently’ we
need firstly to better understand your present circumstances. Try to stay positive as
you sort through the various types of things that might have helped and hindered
you. At the end of this exercise you will be able to identify both your strengths and
areas for development as a university student.
Which of the following reasons, if any, might be relevant to your results on this piece
of assessment? Once again, circle the response that best reflects your current
opinion.
I believe that my assessment result reflects:
My Academic Confidence: Do I think I can do this?
My academic ability: I worry that I’m not
smart enough or don’t have the ability for
university study
My ability in this course: I am concerned
about coping with the content of this
particular course
My ability with this assessment task: I
usually don’t do as well with this type of
assessment (e.g., exams, essays, etc.)
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Academic Motivation: Do I want to do this?
My general motivation: I am starting to
wonder if this is the right degree for me
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My motivation in this course: I can’t get
interested in the material of this particular
course
My motivation with this assessment: I
couldn’t see the point or value of this
particular assessment item
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Beliefs About Learning: How do I approach learning?
My authority: I waited to be told what and
when to study by the teachers in this
course
My approach: I think unless you are able
to learn the material in this course quickly
and easily you are wasting your time and
you won’t ever learn it.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My strategy: I believe that you are either
smart or you’re not, and lots of extra study
or work won’t make much difference to
your result
My priorities: Learning the facts is what’s
most important because theories just
complicate things unnecessarily
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Awareness: Do I know what is expected
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
84
My attendance: I missed some key
tutorials or lectures in this course
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My attention: I haven’t being paying close
attention or taking good notes in class
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My awareness: I misjudged how much
work I had to put in to succeed
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My understanding: I didn’t understand
what was expected for this piece of
assessment
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Commitment: Do I set myself study goals?
My social-study balance: I have been
busy with social commitments or activities
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My work-study balance: I have been
busy with work commitments
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My family-study balance: I have been
busy with my family or carer
responsibilities
My level of achievement: I just want to do
enough to pass.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Study Strategies: Do I study effectively?
My approach: I took the wrong approach
in studying for this task (e.g., I tried to
memorize facts more than analyzing or
understanding)
My organization: I wasn’t organized in my
study or preparation for this assessment
item
My ability to adjust: I didn’t change how I
was studying even though it wasn’t really
working
My reading: I have had trouble with some
of the technical language in this course
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My writing: I have trouble writing in the
way required for this course
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Actions: Do I put my plans into action?
My persistence: I got discouraged and
gave up because things were difficult
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My effort: I didn’t do enough study for the
task
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My timing: I left my study to the last
minute
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My anxiety: I was anxious about the
assessment and that got in the way
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My interest: I got bored with studying
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My focus: I got distracted by other things
that seemed more interesting at the time
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My peers: I didn’t want to do any more
study than my friends were doing
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
85
My Help-seeking: Can I get the help I need to succeed?
My pride: I didn’t understand the work but
I didn’t want to ‘look stupid’ by asking for
help
My confusion: I wanted assistance but I
didn’t know who to ask or if it was okay to
ask for help
My coping: I just thought I would do what I
could and accept the result
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My connection with peers: I don’t know a
lot of other students so I couldn’t check my
ideas or find out what’s going on
My communication with staff: I didn’t
want to bother or felt shy approaching staff
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My online skills: I’m not confident
working online to get the information I
need
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Present Circumstances: What is happening in my life
My crisis : I had an unexpected event or
crisis in my life that got in the way of study
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My health or capacity: I have physical or
mental challenges that I haven’t told
anyone about
My home situation: I don’t have a good
study environment at home
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My finances: I couldn’t afford to buy the
textbook or other materials for this course.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My situation: I started semester late and
have never really caught up with the work
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My English language: I sometimes find it
difficult to understand the lecture or tutorial
material
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My understanding: I think the
expectations for this assessment task were
unclear
My sense of the teaching: I have
difficulty with the way this course is being
taught
My sense of the course: I have difficulty
with the way this course is organized
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My expectations: I have difficulty with the
level of support provided to students in this
course
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Present Sense of University: What it’s like for me here?
My History: Where have I come from
My study habits: I have previously
studied in ways that now don’t seem to
work that well at university
My practice: I feel out of practice because
I haven’t studied in a formal way for a long
time
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
86
My learning curve: I didn’t know many
people who had been to university before I
got here.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My sense of purpose: I don’t really have
a clear idea about why I’m at university
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My choice: I’m at university mostly
because someone else wants or expects
me to be here.
My sense of direction: I don’t really know
what I want to do with my life and career
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Uncertain
Agree
Strongly
agree
My Future: Where am I headed?
4. TRANSLATING YOUR ANSWERS: The next step in ‘making sense about what s going
on’ is to use the diagram on the next page to make a picture of your study behaviour.
What do I think are my strengths or the sound aspects of
my study behaviour?
These are probably the areas where you mostly answered
‘strongly disagree’ or ‘disagree’ to the items above.
What aspects of my study behaviour am I unsure about?
These are probably the areas where you mostly answered a
mix of ‘disagree’ or ‘agree’.
What aspects of my study behaviour I might need to
improve?
These are probably the areas where you mostly answered
‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’.
For these areas place a tick
() on the relevant headings
or sections of the diagram.
For these areas place a
question mark (?) on the
relevant headings or sections
of the diagram.
For these areas place an
arrow (  ) on the relevant
headings or sections of the
diagram.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
87
4.
MY STUDY PROFILE: WHAT DO I THINK IS GOING ON?
My Present Sense of
University
What it’s like for me here?
1. My
Awareness
Do I know what is
expected?
My Academic
Motivation
Do I want to do
this?
My History
Where have I
come from?
4. My Actions
Do I put my plans
into action?
My Help Seeking
Can I get the help
I need to
succeed?
My Academic
Confidence
Do I think I can
do this?
My Beliefs about
Learning
How do I
approach
learning?
My Future
Where am I
headed?
2. My
Commitment
Do I set myself
study goals?
3. My Study
Strategies
Do I study
effectively?
My Present Circumstances
What is happening in my life?
Your Study Profile: Place the symbols ( ? or ) on this diagram to summarize
your feedback to yourself about your study behaviour
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
88
5.
REFLECTING ON WRITTEN FEEDBACK: WHAT DID STAFF TELL ME ABOUT MY
WORK?
The aim of this section is to see if there is any useful information available from the
feedback provided to you on your early assessment. This is likely to have been assignment
(e.g., essay, lab report, portfolio, etc) or an exam (e.g., short-answer, essay or multiplechoice).
Re- read the comments provided by the marker on your assignment.
Summarize this feedback in your own words below.
Positive or encouraging
Critical or developmental
comments
comments
Now please re- read your assignment with these comments in mind.
What feedback about your assignment:
Do you think is accurate?
Do you have difficulty understanding?
Do you have difficulty accepting or agreeing with?
Have you received on previous work?
If you are reflecting on your performance in an exam the class as a
whole may have been given some general feedback or you may
have asked for feedback from your lecturer. What, if anything, can
you say about:
The content of the exam?
Your performance in the exam?
Your reactions after the exam?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
89
DIALOGUE 3: Discussing your study profile with your tutor
Discuss your answers to the ‘what do I think is going on’ questions and your
summary of any available feedback on assessment with your tutor. The purpose
of this discussion is to help you get a better understanding of how you are
approaching the task of learning and studying at university.
You will get more out of this if you focus on understanding rather than spending
a lot of time and energy trying to justify or make excuses. Remember also that it
is quite normal to feel a bit embarrassed or uncomfortable when discussing
these types of topics. Please be assured your tutor is not interested in judging
you and certainly doesn’t think less of you. He/she is on your side and wants
you to succeed.
A. For the first part of this conversation your tutor will work with you to help you
better understand:
Initial reactions: What reactions (e.g., thoughts, feelings, concerns) do you
have to your profile of study behaviour? What did you expect? What was
surprising?
Early Performance: What is your understanding of the key factors that
influenced your performance on the first piece of assessment?
Understanding: How well do you think you understand the reasons for your
current results?
Underlying Issues: Is there anything important that you haven’t raised or may
be concerned about raising?
Responsibility: What level of responsibility or control do you believe is
appropriate for you to accept for your performance?
B. For the second part of this conversation your tutor will work with you to
identify your :
Strengths: What do you think are your strengths or positive factors as a
university student?
Challenges: What are the areas you may wish to change or develop?
As these are identified you may wish write them in the summary table
below.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
90
6.
FUTURE PERFORMANCES: WHAT AM I EXPECTING?
In this section we ask you to consider how you think you might perform in the rest of this course.
The aim here is to identify and understand how hopeful you are about future success. Select the
response(s) that best reflects your current thinking and feelings.
Given my results and my discussions to date, what am I currently
feeling about:
Myself as a uni student?
confident
secure
neutral
worried
anxious
My ability to improve my
study strategies?
My ability to better manage
the main factors reducing my
chances of success?
My chances of success in this
optimistic
hopeful
neutral
discouraged
resigned
optimistic
hopeful
neutral
discouraged
resigned
optimistic
hopeful
neutral
discouraged
resigned
enthusiastic
positive
neutral
indifferent
negative
course?
My experience of this course?
Given my results and discussions to date, how well do I now expect
to do in this course?
Clear fail I can’t see myself passing at this stage
Close fail
I’m not sure I can make it but maybe I can recover in time
Close pass I think I can just do it
Clear pass
I can do it fairly easily
Good pass
I will do well
How sure do you feel about this?
very unsure
a bit sure
fairly sure
reasonably sure
very sure
DIALOGUE 4: Discussing your expectations with your tutor
Please discuss your expectations and feelings about your future performance in this course
with your tutor. In particular, be open to their feedback and encouragement. Your tutor will try
to help you:
Clarify your level of confidence: How well or poorly you expect to do?
Test your certainty: How sure are you are about your expectations? Why?
Understand normal reactions:
have in similar circumstances?
What the common feelings or reactions that most students
Sort out your short-term feelings from realistic judgments: What is an understandable
temporary reaction and what makes more sense in the longer-term?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
91
7.
GOAL SETTING: WHAT IS THE BEST WAY FORWARD?
In this next step we ask you to identify the actions that you might take that would increase your
chances of success. The aim here is to start positively focusing on the best way forward for you
given your present situation:
What options am I seriously considering at this stage?
Change of Life Direction: Withdrawing from university or deferring my
studies
Change of Academic Direction: Withdrawing from this degree program
Strategic Withdrawal: Giving up on this course and focusing on the rest
of my courses
No Change: Persisting with this course and keeping on doing the same
things
Increased Effort: Persisting with this course and working harder
Increased Effort and Strategy Change: Persisting with this course and
making some changes in my approach to study
Increased Effort, Strategy Change and Help-seeking: Persisting with
this course and getting some help to make changes
Other options you might consider?
Based on my understanding of the reasons that contributed to my
present level of performance on this assessment, what strategies or
behaviours might I consider:
Continuing to do?
Doing more of?
Doing less of?
Changing or doing differently?
The priority area that I think will be most helpful for me to focus on at the moment
is:
This makes sense because:
DIALOGUE 5: Discussing your plans and goals with your tutor
Please discuss your intentions and possible strategies with your tutor. In particular,
be open to their feedback and encouragement. Your tutor will be seeking to help you
explore your:
Intentions: Are my intentions positive and helpful?
Strategy selection: Is what I propose an adequate response to the issues?
Motivation: Am I ‘just talking about it’ or am I seriously ‘prepared to try’?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
92
8.
ACTION PLANNING: HOW DO I PUT MY GOALS INTO ACTION?
In this section we invite you to be as practical and specific as possible about what you might do
to progress your situation. The important aim here is to identify and commit to actions that you
will actually implement.
What are the practical steps (e.g., who to contact, what to organize, plans/timetables to make,
workshops to attend, resources to locate, etc) that you will need to take?
The practical steps I will take to realize my change goals are:
1.
2.
3.
What, if anything, might get in the way of you actually implementing your plan (e.g., personal
factors or attitudes, other peoples’ behaviour or attitudes, competing priorities etc.)?
Potential hindrances or blocks
Ways to prevent or reduce these
9.
FOLLOW-UP: HOW CAN I STAY ON TRACK?
You may find it helpful to discuss with your tutor ways in which you can maintain your positive
intentions over the next few months. The aim here is to help you to stay positively focused.
Identify the support and follow-up process(es) that will work best for you.
How will I keep my tutor informed?
I will send my tutor a weekly email report. The first report will be on ………………..
I phone my tutor on this date/time………………………………………………………..
I will make an appointment to see my tutor on this date/time………………………....
I will touch base with my tutor before or after class
How will I improve my support mechanisms?
I will ask ……………………………………………...to work as my study buddy
I will join/form a study group with………………………………………………………....
I will ask my peer mentor for advice
I will get professional help from (e.g., learning advisor, student counsellor, paid
tutor)
I will talk with my family, friends or employer
DIALOGUE 6: Discussing your action and support plans with your
tutor.
Please develop your plans with your tutor’s input. She/he will be able to
tell you about relevant university learning and support services and help
you make practical plans that you can and will actually implement.
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
93
10.
CLOSURE AND REVIEW: HOW USEFUL WAS THIS EXERCISE?
DIALOGUE 7: Reviewing the whole exercise with your tutor
We invite you to have a brief discussion with your tutor about any aspect of this exercise
that you think is relevant.
Is there anything else that you would like to say that you haven’t as yet had a chance to
say?
Are there any questions or concerns that you would like to raise?
How are you feeling at this stage of the exercise?
What feedback, if any, would you like to give your tutor?
Finally, before leaving, please help us improve the process by completing
this brief survey.
Considering your experience of this exercise overall:
not at all
1 2
3
4
very
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
How academically motivated did you feel as a university student before this
exercise?
How academically motivated do you feel as a university student after this
exercise?
How able were you find the help you needed before this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
How able are you to find the help you need after this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
How aware were you of what is expected at university before this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
How aware are you of what is expected at university after this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
How connected did you feel with your tutor before this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
How connected do you feel with your tutor after this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
How likely were you to withdraw or leave university before this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
How likely are you to withdraw or leave university after this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
How personally challenging or demanding was this exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
To what extent did this exercise deal with the real issues?
1
2
3
4
5
How safe and supported did you feel through the exercise?
1
2
3
4
5
How likely do you think you are to follow through with your improvement plans?
1
2
3
4
5
How big is the challenge you face in changing your circumstances?
1
2
3
4
5
How effective was this workbook in helping your learning and planning?
1
2
3
4
5
How effective was the interview with your tutor in helping your learning and
planning?
In what way, if any, was this process challenging or uncomfortable?
1
2
3
4
5
How well do you think you understood your approach to university study before
undertaking this exercise?
How well do you think you understand your approach to university study after
undertaking this exercise?
How academically confident did you feel as a university student before this
exercise?
How academically confident do you feel as a university student after this
exercise?
What, if anything, was the most useful thing about this process?
What suggestions, if any, do you have for how this process could be improved?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
94
First Assessment First Feedback
Tutor Evaluation Form
Tutor name……………………………………Student number:………………………
Please complete this form after each interview and attach to a copy of the
completed student workbook.
not
at
all
mod
very
1.
Clear and agreed goals for the interview were established
1
2
3
4
5
2.
A trusting relationship was established with this student
1
2
3
4
5
3.
An understanding of the tasks to be done was established
1
2
3
4
5
4.
The student was well prepared for the interview
1
2
3
4
5
5.
The workbook process for the interview was followed
1
2
3
4
5
6.
This was challenging and difficult experience for me
1
2
3
4
5
7.
This was challenging and difficult experience for the student
1
2
3
4
5
8.
After the interview this student understood their approach to
university study
1
2
3
4
5
9.
After the interview this student felt academically confident
1
2
3
4
5
10.
After the interview this student felt academically motivated
1
2
3
4
5
11.
After the interview this student is likely to withdraw or leave
university
1
2
3
4
5
12.
After the interview this student understood what is expected
at university
1
2
3
4
5
13.
This student was ready and willing to change or learn from
this experience
1
2
3
4
5
14.
This student got actively engaged in the process
1
2
3
4
5
15.
This student appeared anxious or nervous
1
2
3
4
5
16.
This student appeared frightened of failure
1
2
3
4
5
17.
This student appeared ashamed or guilty
1
2
3
4
5
18.
This student appeared to feel conscripted
1
2
3
4
5
19.
This student appeared sad or depressed
1
2
3
4
5
20.
This student appeared self-critical or angry at themselves
1
2
3
4
5
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
95
21.
This student appeared defensive or angry at others
1
2
3
4
5
22.
This student appeared to deny that there was a real problem
1
2
3
4
5
23.
This student appeared indifferent to any future consequences
1
2
3
4
5
24.
The student was hopeful about changing or improving
1
2
3
4
5
25.
The process achieved effective outcomes for the student
1
2
3
4
5
26.
The interview got to the real issues for this student
1
2
3
4
5
27.
How satisfied are you with the outcomes or how far you got with this
student?
1
2
3
4
5
28.
How satisfied do you imagine that this student was with the
outcomes of the process?
1
2
3
4
5
29.
How optimistic do you feel about this particular student following
through with their plans?
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
30. How optimistic/hopeful do you feel about this particular student
succeeding at university?
What, if any, were the times or issues where you felt ‘out of your depth’ or confused about ‘what best to
do’ with this student?
What, if any, were the times or issues where you felt the working relationship between you and this
student became a little strained or tense?
What, if anything, was frustrating for you in this process (e.g., student attitudes, structures, skill levels,
availability of resources, etc)?
What aspects of the process, if any, didn’t work as well as you would have liked ?
In what ways do you feel you were most helpful with this student?
What, if anything, do you feel you might have done better with this student?
What concerns, if any, do you have about this particular student?
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
96
Sample Invitation Email
Dear (student name),
I am writing to you in my role as your tutor for (course name). By now you would
have received your mark for the first piece of assessment, the (name of
assessment).
I imagine that when you received your mark of (insert actual mark) out of (insert
possible total mark) you may have been surprised or disappointed. You may now be
wondering what the problem was or what you can do to improve.
It is important to say that many students experience some difficulty with early
assessment at university. So you are far from alone. The good news is that we
believe that you have the ability to succeed. The purpose of this email is to offer you
help in doing just that.
As your tutor, I am inviting you to voluntarily participate in a process specifically
designed to help first year students learn from their challenging experiences with
assessment. If you decide to take advantage of this offer you will undertake three
brief activities:



Complete the attached student workbook: First Assessment First Feedback.
Make an appointment to meet with me to discuss this.
After this, identify what positive actions you can take.
I have attached a copy of the workbook to give you a clearer idea of what is involved
in this learning process. I appreciate that you may not have done anything like this
before, but I can assure you that it is a safe and productive process.
We are also very interested in evaluating the effectiveness of these helping
activities. Information about this is contained in a second attachment to this email.
I want to conclude by saying that the School wishes all of its students to succeed,
and to encourage you to make a time to talk with me. Please reply to this email
within a couple of days to let me know your intentions.
I look forward to hearing from you and to working with you.
Kind regards
(Tutor Name)
Facilitating commencing students’ success with early assessment
97