Abstract
Most service-learning modules or community service initiatives (CSI) assess students’ engagement in designated projects and activities which are carried out during a semester and are graded according to a set of approved rubrics. In this study, the diploma and degree CSI students who were engaged in two projects were given the space to share their perceptions and preferences for how assessments can be conducted in relation to their CSI projects. The objective of this paper was to discover if similar trends of students’ perceptions and preferences about CSI assessments exist between the two student cohorts. Therefore, an instrument was designed to capture students’ perceptions and feedback in relation to the assessment modes of the two CSI modules. A pre-course questionnaire and a post-course questionnaire were given out to the students to capture their responses. The data obtained were analysed quantitatively using SPSS 20 with the method of descriptive analysis. The key findings of this paper indicate that the diploma and degree students favour the current assessment modes which include reflection, presentation and fieldwork. Hence, these findings are in line with Millican’s (Student community engagement—A model for the twenty-first century? The Community University Partnership Programme, The University of Brighton, 2007) views on what a typical service-learning course should encompass.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Boswell, L. (2010). The structure trap: Students’ perception of reflection on a co-curricular immersion Service_Learning Trip (unpublished Master’s Thesis). Arcata, CA: Humboldt State University.
Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., Donovan, M. S., & Pellegrino, J. W. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn, brain, mind, experience and school. Expanded edition, National Research Council. Washington: National Academy Press.
Bui, K., & Naga, R. (2014). Project Malaysia Kuala Selangor 2014. Available at: http://www.sealnetonline.org/past-projects/summer-projects-014/project-malaysia-kuala-selangor-2014/. Accessed on July 13, 2015.
De Grez, L., Valcke, M., & Roozen, I. (2012). How effective are self and peer-assessment of oral presentation skills compared with teacher’s assessment? Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(2), 129–142.
Diaz, V., Brown, M., & Salmons, J. (2010). Assessment of collaborative learning project outcomes. Educause Learning Initiatives.
Driscoll, A., Gelmon, S., Holland, B., Kerrigan, S., Spring, A., Grosvold, K., et al. (1998). Assessing the impact of service learning: A workbook of strategies and methods (2nd ed), Centre for Academic Excellence, Portland State University.
Driscoll, A., Holland, B., Gelmon, S., & Kerrigan, S. (1996). An assessment model for service-learning: Comprehensive case studies of impact on faculty, students, community, and institution. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 3(1), 66–71.
Edgerton, R. (1995). Crossing boundaries: Pathways to productive learning and community renewal. AAHE Bulletin, 48(1), 7–10.
Entwistle, N. J., & Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluation of teaching and preferences for contrasting environments. Higher Education, 19, 169–194.
Garrison, C., & Ehringhaus, M. (2006). Formative and summative assessment in the classroom, National Middle School Association (Reprinted in Schools Connection). A Journal of the College of Education, 18(2). Kean University, Union, NJ.
Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Ismail, N. (2007). Enhancing tertiary students’ diversity and academic performance through service learning. URDC Colloquium, 4, 137–143 (MARA University of Technology (Johor)).
Janssens, S., Boes, W., & Wante, D. (2001). Portfolio: een instrument voor toetsing en begeleiding (Portfolio: An instrument for evaluation and coaching). In F. Dochy, L. Heylen, & H. Van de Mosselaer (Eds.), Assessment in onderwijs (Assessment in education) (pp. 203–224). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Lemma.
Langan, A. M., Shuker, D. M., Cullen, W. R., Penny, D., Preziosi, R. F., & Wheater, C. P. (2008). Relationships between student characteristics and self, peer and tutor evaluations of oral presentations. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(2), 179–190.
Lin, S. S.-J., Liu, E. Z.-F., & Yuan, S.-M. (2001). Web based peer assessment: Attitude and achievement. IEEE Transactions on Education, 44, 2. Assessed July 27, 2015.
Lombardi, M. M. (2008). Making the grade: The role of assessment in authentic learning. Educause Learning Initiative.
Magin, D. (1993). Should student peer rating be used as part of summative assessment? Research and Development in Higher Education, 16, 537–542.
Mezzaroba, L. (2000). Concepts of Evaluation among Pharmacy and Biochemistry Faculty and Students at Universidade Estadual de Londrina, Paraná, Brazil. Concepções de Avaliação de Professores e Alunos de Farmácia e Bioquímica da Universidade Estadual de Londrina, Paraná. Revista Brasileira de Educação Médica, 24(3), 53–61.
Millican, J. (2007). Student community engagement—A model for the 21st century? Workshop on Models of Student Community Engagement for the Global Citizens Conference at the University of Bournemouth, September 2007. The Community University Partnership Programme, The University of Brighton.
Mires, G. J., Friedman Ben-David, M., Preece, P. E., & Smith, B. (2001). Educational benefits of student self-marking of short-answer questions. Medical Teacher, 23(5), 462–466.
Pellisson, J. A. (2007). Perceptions of two teachers of foreign language (English) and of their students about evaluation: Implications for teacher’s pre-service education. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil. In D. A. S. Matos, S. D. Cirino, G. T. L. Brown, & W. L. Leite. (2013). Assessment in higher education: Multiple conceptions of Brazilian students, Estudos em avaliaçãoeducacional, 24(54), 172–193.
Race, P., & Brown, S. (1998). The lecturer’s toolkit (2nd ed). London: Kogan Page.
Sambell, K., McDowell, L., & Brown, S. (1997). ‘But is it fair?’: An exploratory study of student perceptions of the consequential validity of assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(4), 349–371.
Segers, M., & Dochy, F. (2001). New assessment forms in problem-based learning: The value-added of the students’ perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 327–343.
Slater, T. F. (1996). Portfolio assessment strategies for grading first-year university physics students in the USA. Physics Education, 31(5), 329–333.
Steinke, P., & Fitch, P. (2007). Assessing service learning. Research and Practice in Assessment, 2, 24–29.
Vieira, V. M. O. (2006). Social representations and educational assessment: What the portfolio reveals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, São Paulo, Brasil: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo.
White, J. V. (2012). Students’ perception of the role of reflection in leadership learning. Journal of Leadership Education, 11(2), 140–157.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this paper
Cite this paper
Abdullah, S.A., Teo, P.H.L., Tee, K.P.L. (2016). Students’ Perceptions About Assessment Modes for Service-Learning Modules. In: Tang, S., Logonnathan, L. (eds) Assessment for Learning Within and Beyond the Classroom. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0908-2_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0908-2_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-0906-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-0908-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)