MASTERS PROGRAMME
Student number:Module:
Dissertation/Assignment Title: / Agreed Grade:
B
Percentage:
62%
Overall Comment
This is a focused assignment, showing insight and understanding into the use of e-portfolios for formative and summative assessment. More detailed and critical analysis would have improved the overall mark, as would adherence to academic referencing conventions and sound proofreading.
Subject Knowledge
You show clear understanding of what is meant by an e-portfolio and you are able to differentiate this from other systems, keeping the focus of the assignment relevant. You include frequent examples of both the impact and use of e-portfolios in general and of aspects of Mahara in particular, which is good, although as a ‘user’ of the latter a little more about the interface, accessibility and experience of teachers and students would have been relevant.
You also show knowledge and understanding of different assessment types, particularly formative and summative, and their particular relationship to electronic systems. You account for many of the issues and opportunities provided by e-assessment and e-portfolios in particular, including motivation and skill of users, system compatibility, data collection and transfer, ownership of learning and mobile access. There might have been some exploration of the disadvantages of open source software (principally the ‘support’ element) and as your comments are broadly about education from pre-post compulsory, some focus on individual subject pedagogy and relevance might have been welcome.
You have read a range of relevant sources, both academic and field-based.
Analysis and Critique
There is some sound analysis in this assignment, where you have evaluated many of the issues and challenges associated with e-assessment and e-portfolios. You have also shown skill in synthesising ideas from your reading research with practical examples from the sector, which is persuasive, and you use quotation effectively to support your assertions. The section where you discuss the difference between formative and summative assessment and evaluate their success through e-portfolios, towards the end of the assignment, is good.
Not all of your analysis is critical, though, or exploratory in nature and there are occasions when you make assertions which are unsubstantiated or, perhaps, generalistic (see comments on assignment). The exploration of Mahara itself could perhaps have been more in depth and analytical, although you do explore some features (for example, the links to social networking and VoiceThread) and perhaps a little more critical analysis about the interface and user experience would have been relevant. However, you do touch on the themes of peer and self-assessment, and relate its use to external bodies, such as the exam boards.
The section on initial and diagnostic assessment was probably not really necessary, and the word count here could have perhaps been used for greater critical analysis of formative and summative forms.
Presentation
Overall your writing style is very clear and accessible. There are occasions when it lacks sophistication, perhaps (the subtitle ‘So what is an eportfolio?’ seems a little informal and not quite right for the genre of an academic assignment), although clarity should always be paramount. Most of your writing is coherent and cohesive, although there is the odd issue of note and perhaps your dividing of the assignment into small sub-sections (some of which contain as little as 150 words) does impact on overall coherence to a degree. However, your introduction and conclusions are very clear and support an overall successful structure. There are some proofreading errors in the text (grammar and punctuation based) and these are key to look out for in future work. Be aware particularly of the possessive apostrophe.
In terms of academic referencing, you have used this consistently throughout the text, including many relevant quotations at pertinent points, which support your assertions. Your referencing within the body of the assignment is not always full (page numbers missing) so ensure that this is something you apply in subsequent assignments.
Your word count is slightly over, but falls within the tolerance.
Advice for Future Work
Try to develop your skills in critical analysis and debate, which will take your writing to a higher level. Ensure that you understand the conventions of academic referencing and that citations are full in the body of your assignment. Finally, proofread your writing for common errors.
Signed (first marker): Sara Hattersley Date: 01/08/12
Moderator/ Second Marker’s Comments (where applicable):
Signed (Second Marker): Date:
The following units from the online Study Skills Toolkit should help you to improve on weaker areas identified in this assignment: www.Go.warwick.ac.uk/wie-studyskills/toolkit
In the ‘Academic Writing’ section
Understanding essay titles
Structure in writing
Improving your paragraphs with topic sentences
Using examples to support written statements
Expressing fact and opinion in writing
Creating cohesion in your writing
The role of the introduction to an essay or report
Understanding conclusions
Writing an effective conclusion
Finding out about plagiarism
Identifying plagiarism and avoiding poor practice
Avoiding plagiarism
Using quotations effectively
Quoting from sources
Using paraphrase in your writing
A strategy for effective paraphrasing and summarising
Revising your written work
Introduction to redrafting and editing
Editing paragraphs and final checking
Proofreading a text
Proofreading for common mistakes
Compiling a reference list
Organising bibliographic entries
Presenting your written work
In the ‘reading and critical thinking’ section
Evaluating sources
Thinking critically about what you read
Analysing the elements of an argument
In the ‘Aspects of Academic Language’ section
Introduction to academic register
Being clear and concise
Contrasting academic writing with other styles of writing
Using appropriate levels of complexity and formality
Choosing the right vocabulary when writing
Expressing abstract ideas effectively
Writing sentences containing complex noun phrases
Using noun phrases for better writing
Using basic punctuation marks effectively
Using colons and semi-colons
Grade / Subject Knowledge / Analysis and Critique / PresentationA*/A
(Mark of 80 or above = A*;
70 -79 = A) / Demonstrates a highly developed understanding of relevant concepts, theories and/or research methodologies. A wide range of relevant sources, which are well understood, are deployed to support arguments. / Recognises the demands of the question providing a well-focused, relevant answer. Sets sources and viewpoints in a wide context and makes a comprehensive assessment of issues involved. Displays awareness of methodological and theoretical considerations. High levels of ability to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and concepts. Detailed examination of issues with reasons for conclusions clearly indicated. Persuasively argued with main issues convincingly evaluated. Some originality of thought and creativity. / Material is very well-organised and the structure complements the content. A high level of written communication with very few errors of spelling, grammar and syntax. Mastery of referencing conventions with very few errors or omissions. Appropriate length.
B
(Mark of 60 - 69) / Sound and thorough grasp of relevant concepts, theories and/or research methodologies although lacking in depth at some points. The work is supported by references to a good range of relevant sources which are used in a relevant way. / Recognises the demands of the question providing a focused, relevant answer which brings out useful points and substantiates them. A good attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and concepts. Appreciates main issues and able to make appropriate critical points. Perceptive commentary on evidence and materials used. / Well-structured work displaying attention to the logic and development of the piece. A clear written style. Spelling, grammar and syntax are generally good. Most features of the referencing system are used correctly. Appropriate length.
C
(Mark of 50 - 59)
Pass Mark
50 / Understanding of main concepts, theories and/or research methodologies is fair but lacks depth and/or breadth. There may be some gaps or areas of confusion. An adequate range of relevant source materials is used. / Although the demands of the question have been recognised, only the basic requirements are covered and there may be some irrelevant material.
The attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and concepts is competent but lacks depth and breadth. Sensible commentary on evidence and materials used though some points may be unsubstantiated. / A generally satisfactory overall structure although it may lack balance in parts or fail to integrate some material. An adequate written style which is not impaired by the occasional errors of spelling, grammar and/or syntax. The recommended referencing system is used but with some errors and omissions. Control of length may be less secure.
D
(Mark of 40 – 49) / Some evidence of reading but understanding of the subject matter is limited. The work displays major gaps in knowledge, serious misconceptions and/or factual inaccuracies. / Introduction of basic concepts and effort made to relate them to the demands of the question which have been only partially understood. Mainly descriptive with much irrelevance and unsubstantiated conclusions. No sustained analysis and an inability to apply knowledge and synthesise material. Uncritical exegesis. / Weak structure. Expression of ideas is sometimes confused or unclear. Communication may also be impaired by errors of spelling, grammar and/or syntax. Referencing marred by frequent errors and omissions. May exceed or fail to meet length requirements.
E
(Mark below 40) / Few relevant sources used. Serious gaps and/or errors in knowledge and understanding indicate that the student has failed to engage seriously with the subject matter. / The question may have been ignored or badly misunderstood. Few or none of the basic requirements of the study have been achieved. Superficial treatment of the topic much of which is descriptive, irrelevant and unsubstantiated. Lacks appropriate critical or theoretical framework
. / Unstructured presentation, lacking coherence. Expression of ideas is poor. Communication may also be impaired by frequent errors of spelling, grammar and/or syntax. The recommended referencing system has not been mastered. Length requirements not met.
80+ An outstanding piece of work, showing total mastery of the subject-matter, with a highly developed ability to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and concepts. All objectives of the set work are covered, and there is evidence of critical reflection, originality of thought and creativity. The work is free of errors with a very high level of technical competence. Ideas are expressed with fluency.
70-79 An excellent piece of work, showing a high degree of mastery of the subject-matter, with a very well-developed ability to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and concepts. All major objectives of the set work are covered, and there is evidence of critical reflection. The work is free of all but very minor errors, with a high level of technical competence. Ideas are expressed with fluency.
60-69 A good piece of work, showing a sound and thorough grasp of the subject-matter, though lacking in the breadth and depth required for a first-class mark. A good attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and concepts, but more limited in scope than that required for a mark of 70+. Most objectives of the work set are covered and there is some evidence of critical reflection. Work is generally technically competent. Ideas are expressed with clarity, with minor exceptions.
50-59 A fair piece of work, showing a grasp of major elements of the subject-matter but possibly with some gaps or areas of confusion. Only the basic requirements of the work set are covered. The attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and concepts is superficial, with a heavy reliance on course materials. Work may contain some errors, and technical competence is at a routine level only. Little critical reflection. Some confusion in expression of ideas.
40-49 Not of a passable level for a postgraduate programme. A poor piece of work, showing some familiarity with the subject-matter, but with major gaps and serious misconceptions. Only some of the basic requirements of the work set are achieved. There is little or no attempt at analysis, synthesis or application of knowledge, and a low level of technical competence, with many errors. Inability to reflect critically on an argument or viewpoint. Ideas are poorly expressed and structured.
Below 40 Work not of passable standard, with serious gaps in knowledge of the subject-matter, and many areas of confusion. Few or none of the basic requirements of the work set are achieved, and there is an inability to apply knowledge. Technical competence is poor, with many serious errors. The level of expression and structure is very inadequate. The student has failed to engage seriously with any of the subject-matter involved.
ID: 1254425
Introduction
There have been many developments in recent years in the way our young learners are assessed, both in the form of public examinations, such as the GCSE, A-Level and International Baccalaureate, to the internal methods used regularly within the classroom that provide, say, assessment for learning (AfL), assessment of pupil progress (APP) or indeed examine personal, learning, thinking skills (PLTS). Ultimately these approaches, which all fall within the category of either formative assessment or summative assessment as defined by Black and William (1998), will continue to evolve and carry with them their critics and supporters along the way.
Probably equally as evolutionary, if not more so, are the increasing number of tools that are available to support the varying methods of assessment. More often than not these tools use some form of technology as the basis for their operation and are becoming more diverse in their appeal to a 21st century learner, who is more technically adept at using these devices and considers them as the 'norm' rather than an obstacle. This form of electronic assessment or e-Assessment is available in a variety of ways. For example mobile technologies, like those used for smartphones and tablets, have not only enabled assessment opportunities to be delivered in a format that the learner is fully conversant with, but they also provide the flexibility in where and when it is undertaken. Computer games are another good example of where e-Assessment has come to the fore, with applications like I Am Learning becoming increasingly popular in secondary schools throughout the UK. Like all other e-Assessment tools, using computer games that have a learning focus do tend to be great motivators, but there are also numerous other benefits such as the development of a more creative and independent learner (Papert 1998).