Download workshops on understanding

A+
Assessment Plus
ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP 5
APPLYING THE CRITERIA TO
YOUR OWN WORK
WORKSHOPS ON UNDERSTANDING
ESSAY ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
FOR FIRST-YEAR STUDENTS
IN THE SCIENCES, SOCIAL SCIENCES,
AND RELATED DISCIPLINES
Assessment Plus (A+) is a two-year consortium project to develop tailored resources for
students and staff that focus on core aspects of assessment criteria. The work is taking place
at London Metropolitan University, Liverpool Hope University College, and Aston University,
radiating out to a number of external partner institutions.
For further details, see the project web site at http://www.assessmentplus.net .
A+ Assessment Workshop 5
(Version April 2004)
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Contents
(Version April 2004)
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
5
Overview of the workshop programme
5
Note to tutors on using the protocols
6
Support materials
6
Comments welcome
6
Attracting students
7
WORKSHOP FIVE: APPLYING THE CRITERIA TO YOUR
OWN WORK
9
Activity 22 – Using the Essay Feedback Checklist
9
Activity 23 – Making action plans from feedback
10
Resources for workshop five
13
The Essay Feedback Checklist
15
Overview of sample essays and marks
17
Sample essay: 1
19
Sample essay: 2
27
Sample essay: 3
31
EVALUATION OF THE WORKSHOP PROGRAMME
37
Overview of evaluation forms
37
Student evaluation form for Workshop 5
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
3
39
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Contents
(Version April 2004)
Student evaluation form for the workshop programme
41
Staff evaluation form for the workshop programme
45
51
REFERENCES
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
4
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Introduction
(Version April 2004)
INTRODUCTION
Overview of the workshop programme
One of the aims of the Assessment Plus (A+) project is to support student learning by
highlighting the role of assessment criteria. This project is intended to enhance students’
academic writing skills and improve their essay writing performance. In doing this we
hope to address national agendas of widening participation and retention as well as
provide practical help to new entrants to Higher Education.
Most students entering Higher Education have only a limited understanding of what is
meant by the term ‘assessment criteria’ and do not automatically target their work towards
meeting the criteria in a way that is acceptable to the demands of their chosen subject.
It is hoped that the proposed series of workshops will:

provide students with a clearer understanding of what assessment criteria are and
how they are used

eradicate any misconceptions students have about what is considered appropriate
writing in Higher Education

demystify the essay-writing process

improve students’ academic writing.
All of the material in this document is freely available for colleagues to use or
adapt, provided acknowledgment is made to Assessment Plus by citing the project
web site.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
5
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Introduction
(Version April 2004)
 Note to tutors on using the protocols
The intention of this document is to provide you with some suggestions for workshop
activities to help your students write better essays. As such it can be used to deliver the
workshop as outlined, either on its own or as part of the series of five workshops, or it can
be regarded as a resource from which to pick and choose specific activities for integration
into existing tutorials or programmes.
The workshop series
Each workshop follows the standard format of a brief rationale followed by a number of
suggested activities. Workshop 1 is a general introduction to assessment criteria and why
they are important. Workshops 2, 3 and 4 each cover two assessment criteria, though
separate workshops could be dedicated to each of the criteria if preferred. Finally,
workshop 5 gets students to put it all together and apply what they have learned to their
next essay or to look at a past essay and see how it could be improved.
Support materials
Most of the materials you will need to run the activities in the workshops are provided with
these downloadable documents. Following each workshop protocol, there is a resources
section containing relevant handouts. Occasionally, you will need to supply some of the
materials needed (such as journals and books for students to evaluate in Workshop 4);
when this is the case, it is clearly indicated in the protocols.
In addition, you may find that you would like to substitute some of your own materials for
the ones provided here. In this case, the protocols and resources can act as a guide or
template.
Comments welcome
Part of the process of developing any support for students involves trialling and
evaluating, and the Assessment Plus team welcomes informal feedback and comments at
any stage. Please contact Katherine Harrington at [email protected] .
In addition, the project has developed evaluation forms for each workshop and for the
series as a whole for both students and staff. Please see the section on Evaluation of
the Workshop Programme towards the end of this document for copies of the forms.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
6
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Introduction
(Version April 2004)
Attracting students
Tutors may offer these workshops as optional or compulsory depending on the local
context and the perceived necessity for such support. For those who are hoping to
encourage students on an optional basis, it is important to avoid any ‘remedial’ overtones.
The following workshop titles are suggested as more student-friendly and more attractive
than the more soberly phrased titles in this protocol. Of course, deciding which titles to
use is a matter for individual tutors who know their own students best and what is most
likely to appeal to them.
Protocol titles
Student friendly titles
Programme Workshops on understanding
assessment criteria for 1st year
students
‘Writing at university’
Workshop 1 What are assessment criteria?
‘The key to improving your
grades’
Workshop 2 Addressing the question
Structuring the answer
‘Where to begin…?’
Workshop 3 Demonstrating understanding
Developing argument
‘How to show you know what
you're writing about’
Workshop 4 Use of evidence
Evaluation
‘Looking for the evidence’
Workshop 5 Applying the criteria to your own
work
‘Becoming more expert in your
essay writing’
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
7
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5
(Version April 2004)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
8
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5
(Version April 2004)
WORKSHOP FIVE:
APPLYING THE CRITERIA TO YOUR OWN WORK
Purpose and rationale
It is important that students feel these workshops have had a point. The easiest way to do
this is by showing how the subjects discussed can be applied to their own work. Although
we have attempted to make the criteria meaningful by including a lot of practical activities,
the real test will come when students attempt to look at their own work in relation to the
criteria.
This workshop is meant to tie up what has been learned from the programme by getting
students to bring their own work to the session.
Alternatively, you could conduct the activities below using one or more of the sample
essays included with this pack.
Structure
This workshop proposes a choice of two activities.
Activity 22 – Using the Essay Feedback Checklist
Students could bring along copies of draft essays and work together in pairs to identify
strengths and weaknesses of their own and each other’s work.  Handout
Alternatively, select one or more of the sample essays included in the resources section.
(The sample essays included here are on introductory topics in the area of psychology.
However, tutors may prefer to provide their own essays that cover different topics.
Suggestions of sample essays to include in future versions of the protocols would be
gratefully received by the A+ team.)
 Handout
Provide students with a copy of the Essay Feedback Checklist (Norton, Clifford, Hopkins,
Toner and Norton, 2002; Norton and Norton, 2001) to support them in this task. In
general, findings from these studies have suggested that there are relatively few
discrepancies between students’ and tutors’ ratings, but that there is a slight tendency for
students to over-rate themselves.
The EFC is a simple tool to enable students to focus on the assessment criteria while they
are actually writing an essay. It then functions as a method of targeting feedback in areas
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
9
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5
(Version April 2004)
where students need it most – i.e., where there is a discrepancy between their own rating
and that of the person marking their essay.
Ask students to complete an EFC for their own essays, before swapping EFCs and
essays with a partner. Students should then mark and give feedback on their partner’s
essay using the EFC. The value of this activity is in getting fellow students to highlight for
each other the criteria which are well demonstrated and those which need working on – a
very basic type of peer assessment. It is hoped that the students themselves will identify
the areas in their essays that need work, but you can be on hand deal with questions and
disputes as they arise.
A satisfactory conclusion might be to ask student pairs to highlight the ‘troublesome’
criteria which could then be used as the focus for tutor reassurance that essay writing is a
skill that improves with practice … .
Activity 23 – Making action plans from feedback
This activity was designed by Laurence Hopkins and Rebecca Clifford of Liverpool Hope
University College. Students could bring along essays they have already produced and
had returned to them with marks and feedback from their tutors. They could then work
through areas that have been highlighted as needing attention as well as see if they can
further improve those areas where they have been successful in meeting the criteria. One
way of helping students with this is to ask them to produce an action plan for what they
intend to change in writing their second essay.
As can be seen, first-year psychology students appear to have valued this activity:
‘From talking about the essays in a group, it has made me realise that most of the
group have had common problems … .’
‘From discussing feedback in a group I have been able to see from others’
feedback how a different approach is needed. Also how some mistakes such as a
lack of evaluation are common, therefore I need to read with a critical eye.’
‘From this detailed feedback I have learnt that other people made the same
mistakes as me so I knew I wasn’t the only one … .’
‘Talking about the essay in a group has helped me think about the changes I need
to make to my own essay. It has helped me think about typical errors which are
made in essay writing (e.g. lack of evaluation) … .’
(Norton et al., 2002, p.121)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
10
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5
(Version April 2004)
Conclusion
By the end of this workshop students should have a much clearer idea of some practical
steps they can take to improve their next essay.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
11
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5
(Version April 2004)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
12
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
RESOURCES FOR WORKSHOP FIVE:
APPLYING THE CRITERIA TO
YOUR OWN WORK
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
13
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
14
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
The Essay Feedback Checklist
The following Essay Feedback Checklist is an adaptation of that developed by Norton, Clifford,
Hopkins, Toner and Norton (2002) and Norton and Norton (2001).
Please give a rating of how confident you feel about having met each of the
assessment criteria:
C = Confident – I think I have met this criterion to the best of my ability.
P = Partially confident – I have tried to meet this criterion but would appreciate more
feedback.
N = Not at all confident – I do not understand this criterion and need more guidance.
C
Addressed the question throughout the essay?
student feedback
Organised the essay clearly with a structure that supports a
considered conclusion?
student feedback
Demonstrated understanding of the research, concepts, and/or
theories?
student feedback
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
15
P
N
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
C = Confident – I think I have met this criterion to the best of my ability.
P = Partially confident – I have tried to meet this criterion but would appreciate more
feedback.
N = Not at all confident – I do not understand this criterion and need more guidance.
C
P
N
Put forward a reasoned argument which shows evaluation and
analysis?
student feedback
Use of evidence to support essay answer?
student feedback
Evaluated research evidence and theoretical concepts?
tutor feedback
Norton, L., Clifford, R., Hopkins, L., Toner, I., & Norton, J.C.W. (2002). Helping psychology
students write better essays. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 2, 116-126.
Norton, L.S. & Norton, J.C.W. (2001). Essay feedback: How can it help students improve their
academic writing? Paper and workshop given at the first international conference of the European
Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing across Europe (EATAW), Groningen, 18-20
June 2001.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
16
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
Overview of sample essays and marks
Title: Compare behaviourist and cognitive explanations of learning using evidence
from both fields.
Essay 1:
74%
Essay 2:
58%
Essay 3:
43%
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
17
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
18
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
Sample essay: 1
Title: Compare behaviourist and cognitive explanations of learning using evidence
from both fields.
Learning is a vital part of being human. Through learning we can acquire new skills,
facts and fit into society successfully through knowledge of their norms of behaviour and
so on. The majority of a humans’ life is devoted to learning, much of which is never even
put into action. Due to evolution, humans are also born with a certain amount of innate
behaviour, for example, babies possess a sucking reflex which is stimulated when placed
near its mother’s nipple. However, all behaviour cannot be innate as our environment is
constantly changing due to advances in technology and so on, consequently, much of our
behaviour must be acquired after birth. Psychologists use the term ‘plastic’ to refer to
learnt behaviour and declare that the more variable the environment the more plastic the
behaviour. (Anderson, p.1-2)
The behaviourist approach in psychology originated in America at the beginning of
the twentieth century. Learning was central to the behaviourist approach, which believed “
most human and animal behaviour could be understood as the result of basic learning
mechanisms operating on the experiences provided by the environment.” (Anderson,
1995) Behaviourists aimed to develop theories without referring to processes going on in
an organisms mind, insisting that psychology should have a firm empirical basis. It was
their claim of being the first truly scientific psychology that contributed largely to the
popularity of behaviourism. Until behaviourism began, psychology had consisted largely of
philosophic speculation, rather than science. Behaviourists argued that by concentrating
only on visible behaviour, all the virtually impossible questions about the mind that
philosophers and psychologists had laboured over for thousands of years could be
avoided. Behaviourism, therefore, appealed to people because it was practical and
focussed on commonsense knowledge rather than trying to obtain ultimate solutions.
(Anderson, p.3 and Hunt, p.262-3) Non-human animals tended to be used in behaviourist
research as when behaviourism began at the turn of the century, Darwin’s theory of
evolution was still influencing societies beliefs and as he argued that we were continuous
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
19
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
with other animals it was thought that the laws of learning that held for animals would also
hold for humans. Also behaviourists felt that research on learning using human
participants may be affected by language and culture. (Anderson, p.3)
The cognitive approach to learning came about in the middle of the twentieth
century and was inspired by the feeling that the behaviourist view of human cognition was
too basic. In contrast, cognitivism was the view that complex mental processes played a
vital role in shaping human behaviour and much of cognitive research involved studying
these mental processes. Cognitive psychologists studied learning using human
participants but called them memory experiments, defining memory as the “relatively
permanent record of the experience that underlies learning.” (Anderson, 1995) The term
‘record’ suggests that the creation of a memory record is a mental change that expresses
the learning. (Anderson, p.3-4)
Learning as a topic in psychology can be traced back to two main sources. The first
is Ebbinghaus’ book On Memory, published in 1883. The German psychologist Hermann
Ebbinghaus was one of the main pioneers of memory research, using himself as his sole
subject. Ebbinghaus is often referred to as the “father of verbal learning” for various
reasons; he developed experimental methodologies suitable for studying learning and
forgetting in humans and which are still used today; he produced the retention curve and
the learning curve; his use of nonsense syllables was applied in verbal learning research
for generations to come; he created interest in serial learning and he gave verbal learning
it’s theoretical basis in associationism. Ebbinghaus, therefore, made methodological and
empirical contributions that influenced later research on human memory, a tradition that
grew to be more renowned than the behaviourally orientated research on learning in
animals. (Kintsch, p.63 and Anderson, p.8)
The second major influence on later research in learning is Pavlov’s work on
classical conditioning. (Pavlov, 1927; 1928) This process involved associations being
made, for instance, food is an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) that elicits the unconditioned
response (UCR) in animals, which is salivation. However, Pavlov discovered that if the
UCS is continually paired with a neutral conditioned stimulus (CS), such as a bell, the CS
eventually acquires the ability to evoke the response by itself. Pavlov found that with every
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
20
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
pairing of the UCS and CS the association was reinforced, however, if repeatedly
presented alone, the CS loses its ability to produce the CR. Pavlov termed this process
extinction. (Kintsch, p.63)
An indication of how, in recent years, the two approaches have begun to merge
together more is how the original learning of the associations has been viewed as
analogous to acquisition (Haberlandt, p.37) and the extinction function for conditioning has
also been compared to the retention or forgetting function for memory, the only
methodological difference being the forgetting function can be obtained by waiting,
whereas extinction requires presentation of the CS without the UCS. The association
between the CS and CR can also suddenly reappear some time after extinction and this
spontaneous recovery also differs from forgetting. (Anderson, p11-12)
Classical conditioning appealed to behaviourists as they saw it as uncomplicated
by the idea of mental processes. However, more recent research on classical conditioning
has viewed the learning as more cognitively involved, which is undoubtedly true in some
cases, such as with humans. (Anderson, p.75) Researchers have also traced the neural
basis of certain instances of classical conditioning in certain organisms. However,
classical conditioning also occurs in animals, such as the Aplysia, (sea slug) that do not
have central nervous systems, let alone a mammalian brain, hence it seems unlikely that
all classical conditioning requires cognitive involvement. (Anderson, p.75)
Thorndike (1898) discovered a second kind of conditioning and called this
phenomena instruemental conditioning. In this kind of associative learning, there is no
unconditioned stimulus that can be presented to elicit the desired response; instead the
experimenter must wait for the organism to carry out the response, usually after a period
of trial and error. Once this occurred the experimenter could reinforce this response by
giving the organism a reinforcing stimulus i.e. a reward such as food or escape. Thorndike
found that through reinforcement he could increase the likelihood of the desired response
being repeated. The model that tends to be used is that of a hungry rat in a puzzle box,
learning to press a bar in order to get a food pellet, which was the reinforcement.
Thorndike suggested that the desired response was gradually strengthened to the
stimulus situation of being in the puzzle box, so that its occurrence became more likely
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
21
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
than other more random responses. He believed that this strengthening process did not
require any cognitive activity and was instead automatic. (Kintsch, p.63-64)
Thorndike’s and Pavlov’s work led to the belief that all behaviour can be explained
in terms of stimulus-response bonds (Anderson, p.15-16) However, Skinner, who was a
neobehaviourist, meaning his approach was a more complex version of behaviourism,
dismissed the idea of stimulus-response associations due to what he referred to as free
operants. These were responses that animals produced in situations without any
observable stimuli manipulation. Skinner made major contributions to the study of
instruemental conditioning, or, as he preferred to call it, operant conditioning. A large
amount of his research involved his work on schedules of reinforcement, which was his
examination into how different relationships between reinforcement and response affected
the frequency with which the response was emitted. For example, he found that if partial
reinforcement was given, the learned behaviour was more resistant to extinction than if
they were trained to expect regular reinforcement as they realised quicker that
reinforcement has ceased. Skinner’s focus was on understanding how behaviour is
controlled and how it could be changed rather than an explanation of what was happening
inside an organism.
One important concept he developed was that of response shaping which was the
idea that existing behaviour could be gradually shaped into a desired form. For example, a
rat could be trained to press a lever harder by selectively reinforcing harder presses.
Skinner also introduced the idea of response chaining which is the view that complex
behaviours are a made up of simple responses, each setting the context of the next. A
complex behaviour could therefore be learnt by teaching each element of the chain until
the whole response was complete. Response shaping and response chaining have been
used to teach animals amazing things. For example, a pig was trained to make breakfast,
pick up dirty clothes and vacuum. (Breland & Breland, 1951) Due to demonstrations such
as this, Skinner concluded that all complex behaviour, including human behaviour, was
the result of response shaping and training produced by appropriate schedules of
reinforcement. (Anderson, p.20-24)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
22
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
Although Skinner’s principles have been successful when applied to areas such as
education and psychotherapy, where the goal is to shape behaviour, it has also been
criticised for overlooking essential aspects of human personality and emotion and trying to
turn humans into robots. Skinner’s approach also had a major scientific problem as it
failed to extend to complex human cognition and this deficiency became blatantly obvious
when Skinner tried to analyse language acquisition in his book, Verbal Behaviour (1957).
Unfortunately for Skinner, the linguist Noam Chomsky (1959) published a highly influential
and damaging critique of the work, arguing that the theory could not explain the
complexities of human language. This critique contributed to the cognitive approach
displacing the behaviourist approach. (Anderson, p.24)
Tolman was an influential critic of learning theories such as Thorndike’s. His main
aim was to show that behaviour was best understood as a response to a goal. One of his
more famous experiments was a study on latent learning. Tolman & Honjik (1930b)
studied 3 groups of rats running a maze with 14 choice points, once a day for 17 days.
Group 1 always found food at the end of the maze, group 2 never found food at the end of
the maze and food was only introduced to group 3 on day 11. The results showed that the
number of wrong choices group 3 made before reaching the end of the maze dramatically
decreased on the 12th day and they even performed better than the group that was
reinforced all along. Tolman concluded that the unreinforced rats had been learning all
along but their learning was latent and was consequently only translated into performance
when a goal was introduced. Thus, for Tolman, reinforcement was not necessary for
learning but was necessary for performance.
A second demonstration (Tolman, Ritchie, & Kalish, 1946) aimed to show that the
rats learned a model of their environment, in this case a cognitive map, rather than a
specific set of stimulus-response associations. In their experiment on place learning, one
group of rats always found food by turning to the right. The other group always found food
in a certain spot but depending on where they started either had to turn right or left.
Tolman et al found that the rats learning to go to a place learned faster than the rats that
were learning a constant response. As a result Tolman proclaimed that the rats learn
locations in a cognitive map rather than specific responses. These results have been
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
23
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
replicated in other studies but others have found the response-learning rats do better.
Restle (1957) suggested that rats could learn either cue-place or direction of turndepending on which of the two cues is more noticeable. Tolman, therefore, managed to
show that it is not behaviour that is learned but rather knowledge that can be used to
guide behaviour. He proposed that organisms learned means-ends readinesses or MERs.
An MER was the expectation that certain choices would lead to certain results. However,
until some goal was introduced these expectations remained hidden. The major criticism
of Tolman’s theory was that he never explained how goals energised them into action.
This problem led Guthrie (1952), an orthodox behaviourist, to complain that Tolman left
his rat in the maze buried in thought. Tolman’s studies opened the door for more
cognitively oreientated research on animal learning although at the time he insisted that
his ideas were compatible with behaviourism. (Anderson, p.18-20)
In summary, the two perspectives have resulted in two different traditions for
studying learning. The behaviourally orientated tradition focuses on animal learning and
the cognitively orientated tradition focuses on human memory. However, the distinction
between the two approaches has begun to break down. Current research on animal
learning tends to have a strong cognitive orientation and behaviouristic learning theories
have begun to be used again in human memory research, for example, the learning
phenomena of conditioning that Pavlov and Thorndike had discovered in animals were
applied by human memory researchers to investigations of forgetting in the pairedassociate paradigm. The original learning of the associations has also been viewed as
analogous to acquisition and forgetting has come to be seen as similar in some respects
to extinction.
References
Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Breland, K., & Breland, M. (1951). A field of applied animal psychology. American
Psychologist, 6, 202-204, cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
24
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
Chomsky, N. (1959). Review of Skinner’s Verbal Behaviour. Language, 35, 26-58, cited in
Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory.
Ebbinghaus, H. (1913) Memory: a contribution to experimental psychology (H.A Ruger &
C.E Bussenues, Trans.). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. (Original
work published 1885) Cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory and Kintsch,
W. (1970) Memory and Cognition.
Guthrie, E.R. (1952) The psychology of learning (rev. ed.) New York: Harper & Row, cited
in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory.
Haberlandt, K. (1999) Human Memory Exploration and Application. Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.
Hunt, M. (1993) The Story of Psychology. New York: Doubleday.
Kintsch, W. (1970) Memory and Cognition. New York: Doubleday.
Pavlov, I. P. (1927) Conditioned reflexes: An investigation of the physiological activity of
the cerebral cortex, London: Oxford University Press, cited in Kintsch, W. (1970) Memory
and Cognition.
Skinner, B.F. (1938) The behaviour of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,
cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory.
Thorndike, E.L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associative
processes in animals. Psychological Monographs, 2 (whole No.8), cited in Anderson, J.R.
(1995) Learning and Memory.
Tolman, E.C., & Honzik, C.H. (1930b). Introduction and removal of reward, and maze
performance in rats. University of California Publ. Psychology, 36, 221-229, cited in
Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory.
Tolman, E.C., Ritchie, B.F., & Kalish, D. (1946). Studies in spatial learning: II. Place
learning versus response learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 221-229,
cited in Anderson, J.R. (1995) Learning and Memory.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
25
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
26
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
Sample essay: 2
Title: Compare behaviourist and cognitive explanations of learning using evidence
from both fields.
Learning is an “Experiential process resulting in the permanent change in behaviour that
cannot be explained by temporary states, maturation or innate response tendencies”
(Klein 1996 p2). Cognitivists believe that learning is believed learning organised internally
and they study internal constructs involving thought and cognition. On the other hand
behaviourists construct a psychology that is based purely on observable events, which are
objective. They consider learning to be dependant on environment. Learning is through
operant, classical or instrumental conditioning. Behaviourists view instrumental and
operant conditioning as having a slight difference on the constructs they observe for each
of these. Cognitivists view learning as through classical conditioning, operant
(instrumental) conditioning or observational learning.
Ivan Pavlov a Russian psychologist studied classical conditioning, which is a valid means
of learning to both groups. In his classic studies Pavlov rang a bell each time before giving
his dogs food and eventually the dogs were conditioned to salivate when they heard the
bell in expectancy of food.
Another way through which people learn is through operant conditioning, which was
studied by Skinner. In his experiments Skinner put a pigeon in a ‘skinner box’, which had
a key hidden in one of the walls. If the pigeon pecked on this key it would release food
from the dispenser, which was outside the box. Behaviourists analyse this in terms of
reinforcement – behaviours that are rewarded are continued. Reinforcement occurs when
the consequence of a response increases the likelihood that the response will be
repeated.
Edward Tolman a cognitivist argued otherwise when he revealed that rats could develop a
cognitive map of running a maze in their brains without any reinforcement. Cognitivists
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
27
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
focus on what happens internally during learning contrary to behaviourists who study
learning in terms of observable behaviours. Behaviourists differentiate instrumental and
operant conditioning by studying instrumental conditioning in terms of response (neutral
response leads to positive outcome and is learnt) while operant conditioning is studied in
terms of reinforcement. Thorndike studied instrumental conditioning and put across the
idea of reinforcement being necessary in learning. He placed a cat in a puzzle box and put
food outside which it could only reach out to if it escaped from the box. Instrumental
conditioning occurred through trial and error. The conditioning follows the law of effect that
says satisfaction increases and decreases the probability of behaviour to be repeated. (M.
Eysenk 1996) Learning also follows the law of exercise, which says that a response will
become strongly connected to stimuli with repetition (Thorndike 1898)
People are able to do things they have never done before but have only seen being done
before for example opening a wine bottle. This is a cognitive learning that theorist Albert
Bandura (1965, 1992) calls observational learning. Ability to perform a certain task is
acquired through observing others do it. In his study of observational learning Bandura
showed young boys and girls a short film of an adult behaving aggressively towards a
bobo doll. After watching this children were taken into a room with several toys including a
bobo doll and they replicated the aggressive behaviour. A control group that had not seen
the film did not behave aggressively towards the doll. (B Smith 1996) Behaviour had been
learnt merely by observation. Observational learning, which is cognitive, can take place
even without reinforcement, which is viewed, as so necessary in operant and classical
conditioning.
Many psychologists view both classical and operant conditioning as too mechanical and
simplistic to account for learning of complex behaviours argue that a number of cognitive
processes are involved in thought and acquiring, modifying and acting on knowledge
affect learning. (Weiner 1991) Edward Tolman argued that rats could learn how to run a
maze as they repeatedly run through the maze. This is similar to a person who has just
moved into anew city and after repeatedly walking from home to the bus stop they
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
28
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
develop a ‘mental map.’ Tolman introduced the concept of latent learning when he
concluded that rats learned cognitively but did not show their knowledge until a reward
was offered.
For cognitivists learning involves memory and as revealed by George Miller (1948) short
term memory has properties that can only be explained in terms of internal events. Some
skill like language cannot be acquired or learnt simply through a stimulus response
process. Language for example is learnt based on a specialised neural system that is
innate. Noam Chomsky a psycholinguist argued that children could generate sentences
they had never had before opposing the behaviourist view that all things are learnt
through observable events. Thus children’s language development cannot be explained
merely by behaviourist principles because children’s vocabulary develops faster than
could be accomplished by simple learning. Karl Lashley (1948) also argued against the
behaviourist view of learning because he says the brain is always active even in the
absence of stimulation.
As opposed to behaviourism which views learning as simply through observable events
cognitivists view learning as through higher mental processes including cognition. They
look in between the stimulus response relationship which behaviourists view as a rather
mechanical process.
References
Rob Ellis, Glyn Humphrey 1999 connectionist psychology
Psychology press publishers
Michael W Eysneck 2000 Psychology: a student’s handbook
Psychology press Sussex
Barry D Smith 1998 Psychology: Science and understanding
McGraw group of companies United States
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
29
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
30
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
Sample essay: 3
Title: Compare behaviourist and cognitive explanations of learning using evidence
from both fields.
The word learning has the definition as the process by which relatively permanent
changes occur in behavioural potential as a result of experience. Learning can also be
referred to as the process of adaptation of behaviour to experience, and memory refers to
the permanent record that underlines this adaptation.
Learning is central to behaviourist conception, unlike cognitive who research a lot about
memory and how our memory encodes, stores and retrieves. I feel both are as equally
important as each other. We can look at both side to the argument, we will start with
behaviourist. There are two kind of basic learning processes that exist: Operant and
Paviovian.
Behaviourism is an approach to psychology that emphasizes casting theories in terms of
external behaviour rather than discussing the internal mechanisms responsible for the
behaviour. Behaviourism was approached in the turn of the 20th century in the U.S.A.
One reason for the early interest in learning was Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, of
how natural selection had changed species so that they were better adapted to their
environment, which is a process of learning.
Behaviourist such as Pavlov researched the development theories with no reference to
what might be happening in the mind. Pavlov theory was about conditioned reflex; he
started this study by putting meat powder in a dog’s mouth and measured the salivation
which is now known as classical conditioning. This type of learning was that if you get use
to the conditions and as soon as the condition is introduced to you, you automatically
react as it comes into view as you have become use to it and therefore you know what is
going to happen.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
31
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
Animal learning is the behaviourist orientation as is illustrated by Ivan Petrovich Pavlov.
Pavlov also had a basic methodology with biologically significant such as unconditioned
stimulus (US), which reflexively evokes some unconditioned response (UR). For example
food is a US and salivation is a UR. The US is paired with a neutral conditioned stimulus
(CS), such a bell. After a number of tests the CS acquires the ability to do the response by
itself, this is called conditioned response.
Ebbinghaus established experimental methodologies for studying memory phenomena,
such as the retention curve and the learning curve. Ebbinghaus conducted an experiment
that practising data, showing the total number of trials needs to master a set of lists as a
function of the number of days of practice. This was quite important as he tested humans
instead of animals and showed that it was possible for this type of experiment to be
conducted.
Another interesting theory is the learning curve which is a crucial activity in a human
culture. The learning curve presents some of the most famous skill, as the skill is more
practised; the skill undergoes dramatic changes, including great reductions in cognitive
involvement. For example if you revise for a test a week before the test continuously until
the test it is likely that you will remember more, as you encode, store and retrieve. Were
as if you revise a day before, your brain has not had the chance to practise storing the
information. This is based on operant conditioning which has 3 concepts: rein forcer,
operant and discrimination. Extinction occurs when there is a negative contingency
between the conditioned stimulus and the unconditioned.
This learning curve has also been studied by Crossman who claims that “it takes a certain
amount of time for nerve impulses to reach the brain receptor, such as the eye, and to go
from the brain to effectors, such as the hand”.
Thorndike was also a behaviourist who studied learning, but studied a rather different
situation then Pavlov. Thorndike thought that a stimulus- response bond would be formed
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
32
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
whenever reinforcement followed emission of the response in the presence of the
stimulus. Thorndike’s experimental apparatus, called a puzzle box. He put a hungry cat in
a box with some food outside. If the cat hit the loop of wire, the door would fall open and
the cat could escape and eat the food.
Tolman was a behaviourist but did not agree with the way the psychologist were
conducting their experiments. Tolman argument came at a cognitive point that behaviour
was best understood as a response to a goal, and that is when he came with a model
called the cognitive map. One of Tolman finds have made the most impact upon me that
“it is not behaviour that is learned but rather knowledge that can be used to guide
behaviour”. For instance a footballer found that shooting the ball in to the opponent’s box
would lead to them scoring a goal, and maybe wining the game.
The cognitive map is the mental representation of the layout of objects and routes in a
given space that an organism can use to guide the captive to be released.
Keller also studied learning but at a different angle and more tradition for a behaviourist; of
mastery learning for example significant instructional gains can be achieved by ensuring
that students have mastered earlier material before progressing to later material. A
student must continue practising even when mastered the process of learning in order to
succeed.
Cognitive had a more different approach to analysis instructional material into its cognitive
components enables more effective instruction to be condensed.
This is a very significant as a behaviourist and cognitive have similarities and do use each
others theories.
Cognitive is some what different but doing look at the behavioural side for similarities.
Cognitivism is an approach to psychology that involves abstract description of the
information processing mechanisms responsible for behaviour. Where as behaviourist
look at the internal mechanisms responsible for behaviour, but both look at the
mechanisms responsible for behaviour.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
33
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
In the 1950’s cognitivism and behaviourist as psychologist began to shift, cognitive
thought that behaviourist had created too simple a picture of human cognition. Cognitive
psychologist where similar some what with behaviourist because they both began
studying learning, but were they differed was that the cognitive psychologist did so in the
guise of so called memory experiments on humans were as behaviourist would conduct
their experiments on animals.
So this divided the two into behaviourally orientated studies of animals and cognitively
oriented of human memory.
Cognitivism positions the complex mental process played in shaping human behaviour,
and much of the field shifted to studying these mental process. Cognitive came u with a
theory that memory is the record of the experience that underlies learning. John Watson
had a very different view from cognition he claimed that “there is no such thing as memory
and that people just learned the way of behaving”.
Much more recent research has had the behaviourist having a more cognitive orientation
when testing animal learning and vicea-virsa that cognitive have had a more
behaviouristic learning theory in research on human memory.
In conclusion there are a lot of similarities and differences in the way behaviourist and
cognitive explain learning. Their most obvious difference is the way they conduct
experiments and what they are concentrating on. Behaviourists conduct their experiments
on animals and learning through behaviour, where as cognitive conduct their experiments
on humans and concentrate on the memory side of learning. But each is not without its
criticism.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
34
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Resources
(Version April 2004)
Reference
Thorndike, E.L. (1968). Human learning. New York: Johnson Reprint Crop. (original work
published 1928-1929)
Tolman, E.C. (1967). Purposive behaviour in animals and men. New York: Irvington.
(Original work published 1932)
Leahey, T.H. (2001). Learning and Cognition. Texas: R.R. Donnelly & Sons Co. (Original
work published 1980)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
35
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
36
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
EVALUATION OF THE WORKSHOP PROGRAMME
We have tried to design a programme of workshops that is founded in past experience
and research findings, but of course that is no guarantee it will work!
The Assessment Plus team is keen to improve the workshops in response to student and
staff feedback. Included on the next pages are two types of student feedback form and
one staff evaluation form.
Should you choose to use any of these forms (or a modified version of them to suit your
particular needs), the Assessment Plus team will be happy to receive them; we will
analyse the data for you and return a brief summary report for your own use. Subject to
the usual condition of ensuring that no individual and no institution is identified, the
Assessment Plus team would ask that these data might also be used in research
publications.
Overview of evaluation forms
 The first type of student evaluation form has been designed to be delivered after
each workshop session. There is one form for each session, and the questions relate
specifically to the aims and learning outcomes of the individual sessions.
 The second type of student evaluation form has been designed to be delivered at
the end of a series of workshop sessions. The questions on this form focus on getting
students’ opinions on whether or not the workshops helped them to understand the
meaning and importance of essay assessment criteria and the relevance they think the
workshops will have for their future work and performance.
 The staff evaluation form includes questions that largely mirror those asked in the
second type of student evaluation form.
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
37
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
38
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
Student Evaluation Form
Workshop 5: ‘Becoming more expert in your essay writing’ (Applying
the Criteria to Your Own Work)
Student ID Number _________________
University ____________________________
Subject(s) of Study ________________________________________________________
Gender: Male / Female (please circle)
Age: Under 21 / 21-25 / 25+ (please circle)
(The above details are required for the purposes of data analysis only. Results of this evaluation
will be presented in reports as overall percentages, so no individual will ever be identified.)
_______________________________________________________________________
This questionnaire has been designed to find out how successful you think we have been
in helping you achieve the specific aims of this workshop. To do this in a way that will
help us modify and improve this workshop, we have identified the aims and the learning
outcomes (i.e. what we hope you’ve learned). What we need to know is if you think they
have worked or not for YOU, so please be absolutely honest!
For each outcome circle the one response that most accurately reflects what you feel you
have learned, where Y = Yes definitely, NS = Not sure, N = No definitely not, DU = don’t
understand.
Having completed this workshop:
I am able to identify strengths and weaknesses in my essays.
Please circle
Y NS N DU
I am able to identify areas in my essay writing that need further work. Y
NS N
DU
I know what steps to take to work on those areas that need improving. Y
NS N
DU
I understand how what I have learned in the workshop programme
can be applied to my own work.
I know how to benefit from my tutors’ feedback.
Y
NS N
DU
Y
NS N
DU
Continued . . .
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
39
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
Student responses are an important and valued part of our continuing development
of the workshops programme.
If you wish to make any additional suggestions that you think might help us, please use
the space below.
Which were the most helpful aspects of this workshop?
Which were the least successful aspects?
How could this workshop be improved?
How will what you have learned help you with your essay writing?
Thank you very much for taking the time to complete this questionnaire!
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
40
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
Assessment Criteria Workshops: Student Feedback Questionnaire
Assessment Workshops are an experimental form of small group learning developed by the
Assessment Plus project. Student feedback is an important part of the evaluation and further
development of the workshops and related initiatives, so we are extremely grateful for
information about your experiences.
1. What did you think when you first found out about the workshops?
2. How many of the workshops did you attend?
None 
One Two Three 
Four 
All five 
3. When you did not attend workshops, what was the main reason?
Please tick a box to show how much you agree or disagree with each statement.
Strongly Disagree
disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
agree
4. The workshops helped me to
understand what assessment
criteria are.





5. The workshops helped me to
understand what makes a good
essay.





6. The workshops confused me
about what makes a good essay.





7. The workshops helped me to
understand my subject.





8. The workshops helped me to
prepare for the module
assessment.





A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
41
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
Strongly Disagree
disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
agree
9. The workshops will help me to
write better essays.





10. The workshops will help me
achieve a better grade in future
essays.





11. The workshops will help me to
make better use of feedback from
tutors on my essays.





12. The workshops helped me to
study more effectively.





13. The workshops were useful
only for university writing.





14. The workshops were useful for
writing outside university.





15. The workshop on what
assessment criteria are was useful
(workshop 1).





16. The workshop on addressing
the question and structuring an
answer was useful (workshop 2).





17. The workshop on
demonstrating understanding and
developing argument was useful
(workshop 3).





18. The workshop on use of
evidence and evaluation was
useful (workshop 4).





19. The workshop on applying the
criteria to my own work was useful
(workshop 5).





A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
42
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
Strongly Disagree
disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
agree
20. The workshops helped me
understand how to ‘address the
question’ in an essay.





21. The workshops helped me
understand how to ‘structure’ an
essay.





22. The workshops helped me
understand how to ‘demonstrate
understanding’ in an essay.





23. The workshops helped me
understand how to ‘develop an
argument’ in an essay.





24. The workshops helped me
understand how to ‘use evidence’
in an essay.





25. The workshops helped me
understand how to ‘critically
evaluate’ in an essay.





26. The workshops helped me
understand how to use appropriate
language in an essay.





27. The workshops helped me
understand how to identify
strengths and weaknesses in my
own writing.





28. The workshops helped me feel
more confident about writing at
university.





29. The workshops made me feel
more anxious about writing at
university.





A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
43
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
30. Please indicate how much of what you learned in the workshops was new to you?
None of it 
Some of it 
About half of it 
Most of it 
All of it 
31. What would you say to a student considering joining one of these workshops in the
future?
32. What was good about the workshops, or went well?
33. What was poor about the workshops, or went badly?
34. What was missing from the workshops, or should have been included?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS!
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
44
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
Assessment workshops: Staff feedback questionnaire
Assessment workshops are an experimental form of small group learning developed by
the Assessment Plus project. Staff feedback is an important part of the evaluation and
further development of the workshops and related initiatives, so we are very keen to hear
your views and appreciate detailed responses wherever possible.
1. What did you think when you first found out about the workshops?
2. Please list the workshops/activities that you delivered, along with any specific
comments you wish to make (e.g., on their relevance, accessibility, ease of delivery, etc.).
(Please attach a separate sheet if that is more convenient.)
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
45
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
In the following section, we ask for your views on how students responded to the
workshops and the value you think the workshops had for students.
Please tick a box to show how much you agree or disagree with each statement.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
agree
3. The workshops helped
students to understand what
assessment criteria are.





4. The workshops helped
students to understand what
makes a good essay.





5. The workshops confused
students about what makes a
good essay.





6. The workshops helped
students to understand their
subject.





7. The workshops helped
students to prepare for the
module assessment.





8. The workshops will help
students to write better essays.





9. The workshops will help
students achieve a better grade
in future essays.





10. The workshops will help
students to make better use of
feedback from tutors on their
essays.





11. The workshops will help
students to study more
effectively.





A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
46
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
agree
12. Students responded
positively to the workshops.





13. Students found the
workshop on what assessment
criteria are useful (workshop 1).





14. Students found the
workshop on addressing the
question and structuring the
answer useful (workshop 2).





15. Students found the
workshop on demonstrating
understanding and developing
argument useful (workshop 3).





16. Students found the
workshop on use of evidence
and evaluation useful
(workshop 4).





17. Students found the
workshop on applying the
criteria to their own work
useful (workshop 5).





18. The workshops helped
students understand how to
‘address the question’ in an
essay.





19. The workshops helped
students understand how to
‘structure’ an essay.





20. The workshops helped
students understand how to
‘demonstrate understanding’ in
an essay.





A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
47
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
agree
21. The workshops helped
students understand how to
‘develop an argument’ in an
essay.





22. The workshops helped
students understand how to
‘use evidence’ in an essay.





23. The workshops helped
students understand how to
‘critically evaluate’ in an essay.





24. The workshops helped
students understand how to use
appropriate language in an
essay.





25. The workshops helped
students understand how to
identify strengths and
weaknesses in their own
writing.





26. The workshops helped
students feel more confident
about writing at university.





27. The workshops made
students feel more anxious
about writing at university.





Continued . . .
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
48
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
28. Please list the kind of verbal feedback you received from students about any aspect of
the workshops.
In this section we ask for your views on the design and purpose of the workshops
and on their effectiveness in facilitating teaching.
Strongly
disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
agree
29. The workshops seemed
useful only for university writing.





30. The workshops seemed
useful for writing outside
university.





Please attach a separate sheet if that is more convenient.
31. Generally, what do you think worked well about the workshops?
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
49
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - Evaluation
(Version April 2004)
32. Generally, what do you think went badly?
33. Would you recommend removing any aspects or activities from the workshops?
34. Would you recommend adding anything?
35. Would you recommend these workshops to future students?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS!
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
50
A+ Social Sciences Workshop 5 - References
(Version April 2004)
REFERENCES
Norton, L., Clifford, R., Hopkins, L., Toner, I., & Norton, J.C.W. (2002). Helping
psychology students write better essays. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 2 (2),
116-126.
Norton, L.S. & Norton, J.C.W. (2001). Essay feedback: How can it help students
improve their academic writing? Paper and workshop given at the first international
conference of the European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing
across Europe (EATAW), Groningen, 18-20 June 2001. [Copy of paper can be
obtained from the first author.]
A+
Assessment Plus: Using assessment criteria to support student learning
HEFCE funded consortium project
51