Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Emergent Versus Planned Assessment and Tuition Strategies for Online Postgraduate Teaching of Technology and Innovation Management at the Open University, UK

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
On the Line

Abstract

This chapter examines the development of the assessment and tuition strategy (ATS) for the online postgraduate teaching of technology and innovation management (TIM) at the Open University, UK. Both curriculum content and the ATS have changed significantly in the 25 years since the introduction of this taught programme. Drivers of change have been many and various including factors both internal and external to the institution. Some ATS changes have been prescribed or specifically designed, for example, to address new institutional policy, but others have evolved more gradually, through learning from experience and exploration. The chapter outlines the curriculum, identifies the significant changes made to the ATS together with their rationale, and evaluates the effectiveness of both the current ATS, as a whole, and the approach to its development. Evaluation draws on a variety of internal review activities as well as the benchmarks of good practice in the literature. The chapter concludes that the ATS has considerable strengths and that the combination of prescriptive and emergent approaches to development of the ATS, enabled by online learning tools, serves the programme well.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ashford-Rowe, K., Herrington, J., & Brown, C. (2014). Establishing the critical elements that determine authentic assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(2), 205–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettley, A., Walshe, J., Lucas-Smith, A. (2010, September 1–3). Assessment in postgraduate technology management qualifications. Paper presented at the EARLI SIG Assessment conference 2010, Northumberland, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohemia, E., Harman, K., & McDowell, L. (2009). Intersections: The utility of an ‘assessing for learning’ discourse for design educators. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education, 8(2), 123–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long-term learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2016). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 400–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, S., & Roberts, E. (2016). ‘Simultaneous immersion’: How online postgraduate study contributes to the development of reflective practice among public service practitioners. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(7), 1692–1705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavanaugh, J. K., & Jacquemin, S. J. (2015). A large sample comparison of grade based student learning outcomes in online vs face-to-face courses. Open Learning, 19(2), 25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, Y. F., & Gurnam, K. S. (2010). Authentic assessment and pedagogical strategies in higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 153–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crotty, J., & Horrocks, I. (2017). Managing legacy system costs: A case study of a meta-assessment model to identify solutions in a large financial services company. Applied Computing and Informatics, 1, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunha, M. P., Palma, P., & da Costa, N. G. (2006). Fear of foresight: Knowledge and ignorance in organizational foresight. Futures, 38, 942–955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • den Exter, K., Rowe, S., Boyd, W., & Lloyd, D. (2012). Using web 2.0 technologies for collaborative learning in distance education – Case studies from an Australian university. Future Internet, 4, 216–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dibrell, C., Craig, J. B., & Neubaum, D. O. (2014). Linking the formal strategic planning process, planning flexibility and innovativeness to firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 67, 2000–2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J., Jordan, S., & Wolfenden, F. (2016). Developing academics’ assessment practices in open, distance, and e-learning: An institutional change agenda. Open Learning, 31(2), 91–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (2003). Strategic planning in a turbulent environment: Evidence from the oil majors. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 491–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallett, F. (2013). Study support and the development of academic literacy in higher education: A phenomenographic analysis. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(5), 518–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W. (2005). Teachers’ summative practices and assessment for learning – tensions and synergies. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 207–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horrocks, I. (2016). T849 Strategic capabilities for technological innovation: assessment guide. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Industrial Research and Advisory Committee of the Commission of the European Communities (IRDAC). (1991). School and industry and skills shortages in Europe. Brussels, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, L. T., & Casidy, R. (2016). Authentic assessment in business education: Its effects on student satisfaction and promoting behaviour. Studies in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/03075079.2016.1165659.

  • Jennings, P. L., & Ottewill, R. (1996). Integrating open learning with face-to-face tuition: A strategy for competitive advantage. Open Learning, 11(2), 13–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, T., El Hakim, Y., & Gibbs, G. (2014). The whole is greater than the sum of the parts: A large scale study of students’ learning in response to different programe assessment patterns. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 73–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantirou, M., Fisher, W. (2010). Embedding coherence and variety in assessment: A Faculty’s experience in reviewing assessment across modules and qualifications. Paper presented at the UCLan 2010 Assessment Conference 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lea, M. R. (2004). Academic literacies: A pedagogy for course design. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 739–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J., & De Luca, R. (2014). Review of assessment feedback. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 378–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, T. W. (2012). Assessment in higher education in the professions: Action research as an authentic assessment task. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(6), 686–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutcheon, K., Lohan, M., Traynor, M., & Martin, D. (2015). A systematic review evaluating the impact of online or blended learning vs face-to-face learning of clinical skills in undergraduate nursing education. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 71(2), 255–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, L., Wakelin, D., Montgomery, C., & King, S. (2011). Does assessment for learning make a difference? The development of a questionnaire to explore the student response. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(7), 749–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. B. (1998). Strategy safari. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B., & Lampel, J. B. (2008). Strategy safari: The complete guide through the wilds of strategic management. London: FT Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer, F., Figge, F., & Hahn, T. (2016). Planned or emergent strategy making? Exploring the formation of corporate sustainability strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25, 323–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donovan, B., Rust, C., & Price, M. (2016). A scholarly approach to solving the feedback dilemma in practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 938–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, S., Scott, M., & Conboy, K. (2011). A Delphi study on collaborative learning in distance education: The faculty perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(6), 939–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paarlberg, L. E., & Bielefeld, W. (2009). Complexity science – An alternative framework for understanding strategic management in public serving organizations. International Public Management Journal, 12(2), 236–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, D., Flores, M. A., & Niklasson, L. (2016). Assessment revisited: A review of research in assessment and evaluation in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(7), 1008–1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilkington, C., & Sanders, I. (2014). An online collaborative document creation exercise in and ODL research project module. Computers & Education, 77, 116–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, M., Carroll, J., O’Donovan, B., & Rust, C. (2011). If I was going there I wouldn’t start from here: A critical commentary on current assessment practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(4), 479–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. (2006). Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education section 6: Assessment of students.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rae, A. M., & Cochrane, D. K. (2008). Listening to students – How to make written assessment feedback useful. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(3), 217–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, J. T. E. (2009). Face-to-face versus online tutoring support in business studies courses in distance education. International Journal of Management Education, 7(3), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, R. (2011). Good strategy, bad strategy. London: Profile books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rust, C. (2000). An opinion piece – a possible student-centred assessment solution to some of the current problems of modular degree programmes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1(2), 126–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rust, C. (2002). Purposes and principles of assessment, Learning and Teaching Briefing Papers. Oxford, Uk: Oxford Brookes University – Oxford centre for Staff Learning and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saltmarsh, D., & Saltmarsh, S. (2008). Has anyone read the reading? Using assessment to promote academic literacies and learning cultures. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(6), 621–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scottish Qualifications Authority. (2009). Guide to assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, O. (2012). Supporting Students for Success in Online and Distance Education: Routledge. 

    Google Scholar 

  • The Open University. (2014a). Group tuition policy (S-2014-04-09). Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Open University. (2014b). New models of assessment and tuition project report SEP/SG/1411/02 17. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. (2009). An investigation into written comments on assignments: Do students find them usable? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yorke, M. (1998). The management of assessment in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 23(2), 101–116.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Engineering and Innovation, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK

    Alison Bettley & Ivan Horrocks

Authors
  1. Alison Bettley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ivan Horrocks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alison Bettley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business, Athabasca University, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Anshuman Khare

  2. Faculty of Business, Athabasca University, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Deborah Hurst

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bettley, A., Horrocks, I. (2018). Emergent Versus Planned Assessment and Tuition Strategies for Online Postgraduate Teaching of Technology and Innovation Management at the Open University, UK. In: Khare, A., Hurst, D. (eds) On the Line. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62776-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation