Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Supporting Student Learning with Cumulative Coversheets

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ipsative Assessment and Personal Learning Gain

Abstract

A case study is presented in which ipsative assessment is practised through using cumulative coversheets to track student progression and record dialogue with the tutor. As hoped and intended, this method encouraged reflection and helped focus students’ attention how best to make clear and specific improvements to their work, as well as improving the quality of feedback. Cumulative coversheets have provided a structure for recording and developing students’ metacognition and self-regulation and documenting their progress.

Additionally and more unexpectedly, was the finding that using ipsative assessment provided an additional benefit of strongly reminding tutors that getting to know learners and responding to their needs pays off handsomely in terms of student engagement and commitment. This led, more broadly, to the adoption of a friendlier and more personal tone which seems to have helped improve student achievement, and resulted in a good atmosphere in class with high levels of participation and engagement.

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 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    Qualitative data in the chapter are drawn from formal university-administered student evaluations and informal, in-class mid-module evaluations. Extracts from seven different focus groups are also included, from discussions held over the life of the module for various formal and informal purposes including: module review; on-going reflective evaluation of teaching methods and curriculum content; trips to museums and galleries; and efficacy of the assessment-feedback loop.

  2. 2.

    The module content and assessment has adapted and changed over time but has always included reviews of the places visited, plus a more general paper about broader issues in museum and gallery education. More typically, assessment for Year Two modules consists of one long essay (4000 words) and so the short-paper format offers variety. Writing multiple short papers brings with it possible benefits as well as potential additional challenges such as developing the flexibility to cope with different assessment styles.

  3. 3.

    An Academic Learning Advisor (ALA) helped to deliver the feedback where possible. This served to maximise the students’ understanding of the feedback since having two experienced staff members present allows for more than one explanation of the points being raised. Through extensive one-to-one work with students the ALA has practical strategies to suggest and useful metaphors and analogies to help explain how to make improvements, study more ‘smartly’, write more clearly, manage time more efficiently and answer the question more fully, yet succinctly, etc.

  4. 4.

    Ipsative assessment chimes with the work of Dweck around the value of cultivating flexible mindsets (Dweck 2012).

  5. 5.

    For the last three years, the face-to-face meetings have also been digitally recorded and emailed to the students following feedback from students that they do not always remember everything that has been said. This has been described as ‘the most useful type of feedback that I can replay when it suits me and when I need a blast of motivation’.

  6. 6.

    For more detail on this, see Nicol who explores this in depth, citing Laurillard’s work on dialogue and the ‘goal-action-feedback cycle’ (2010, p. 503).

  7. 7.

    Being able to transfer what has been understood to other modules is helpful. This can be evaluated through synoptic assessment which enables students to show their ability to integrate their learning and apply it across their programme (QAA 2006, Section 7). For ipsative assessment to be fully of value, it would be worth seeing how well the improvements transfer across all spheres of study.

  8. 8.

    Some peer review has been used on the module, with varying degrees of success, but the material does not lend itself to this style of working as much as other modules. See Nicol (2010) for some useful discussions of pros and cons of peer review particularly in large group teaching.

References

  • Biggs, J. (1993). What do inventories of students’ learning process really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. (1995). Assessment and learning: Contradictory or complementary? In P. Knight (Ed.), Assessment for learning in higher education (pp. 35–48). London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, E., & Glover, C. (2006). Evaluating written feedback. In C. Bryan & K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 81–91). Abingdon, Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S., & Knight, P. (1994). Assessing learners in higher education. Oxford: Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chanock, K. (2000). Comments on essays: do students understand what tutors write?. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(1), 95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crisp, B. R. (2007). Is it worth the effort? How feedback influences students’ subsequent submission of assessable work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(5), 571–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindset: How you can fulfill your potential. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harnish, R., & Bridges, K. R. (2011). Effect of syllabus tone: Students’ perceptions of instructor and course. Social Psychology of Education, 14(3), 319–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harnish, R. J., O’Brien McElwee, R., Slattery, J. M., Frantz, S., Haney, M. R., Shore, C. M., et al. (2011). Creating the foundation for a warm classroom climate: Best practices in syllabus tone. Association for Psychological Science Observer, 24, 23–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, R., Hartley, P., & Skelton, A. (2002). The conscientious consumer: Reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 53–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). (2013). Network literature review of research into widening participation to higher education, conducted by the ‘Aimhigher Research and Consultancy’. http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce/content/pubs/indirreports/2013/Literature,review,of,WP,to,HE/Literature%20review%20of%20research%20into%20WP%20to%20HE.pdf. Accessed May 2015.

  • Hughes, G. (2011). Aiming for personal best: A case for introducing ipsative assessment in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36(3), 353–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, G., Wood, E., & Kitagawa, K. (2014). Use of self-referential (ipsative) feedback to motivate and guide distance learners. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 29(1), 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lublin, J. (2003). Deep, surface and strategic approaches to learning (good practice in teaching and learning). Dublin: University College Dublin, Centre for Teaching and Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning – 1: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordrum, L., Evans, K., & Gustafsson, M. (2013). Comparing student learning experiences of in-text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback: Strategies for formative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(8), 919–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orr, S. (2007). Assessment moderation: constructing the marks and constructing the students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(6), 645–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quality Assurance Agency (QAA). (2006). Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher ducation. Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP). (2009). Widening participation in higher education: A commentary by the teaching and learning research programme. http://www.tlrp.org/pub/documents/HEcomm.pdf. Accessed June 2015.

  • Thompson, S., Milsom, C., Zaitseva, E., Stewart, M., Darwent, S., & Yorke, M. (2013). The forgotten year? Tackling the second year slump Liverpool John Moores University/higher education academy. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/project/7903. Accessed May 2015.

  • Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, M. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(3), 379–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Roehampton University, London, UK

    Carrie Winstanley

Authors
  1. Carrie Winstanley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carrie Winstanley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. UCL Institute of Education, University of London, London, United Kingdom

    Gwyneth Hughes

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Winstanley, C. (2017). Supporting Student Learning with Cumulative Coversheets. In: Hughes, G. (eds) Ipsative Assessment and Personal Learning Gain. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56502-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56502-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-56501-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-56502-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation