Balancing pedagogical innovation with psychological safety?

IF 4.1 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Stephanie Wake, Madeleine Pownall, Richard Harris, Pam Birtill
{"title":"Balancing pedagogical innovation with psychological safety?","authors":"Stephanie Wake, Madeleine Pownall, Richard Harris, Pam Birtill","doi":"10.1080/02602938.2023.2275519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Authentic assessments are designed to evaluate knowledge and skills that are relevant for students’ life beyond university, emphasising practical, applied skills. They offer an alternative to assessments that don’t explicitly foster transferability of skills. The present study examined undergraduate student perceptions of authentic and traditional assessments (N = 150). We used a qualitative story completion methodology to examine three domains: student’s emotional responses to authentic and traditional assessment forms, student’s perceptions of how different assessment types may benefit their employability, and student’s preferences for pedagogical support with authentic assessments. A qualitative content analysis revealed students generally perceive authentic, novel assessments to be exciting, motivating and inspirational; however, this was accompanied by feelings of uncertainty and unfamiliarity. More traditional assessments (e.g. essays and multiple-choice-question examinations) elicited feelings of comfort and preparedness, but students also felt worried, bored and unexcited by these assessments. Students appreciated creative freedom when lecturers set traditional assessments but would like more consideration of their feelings and need for support in authentic assessments. Hence, we argue, when advocating for authentic assessment, there is a balance to be struck between innovation and challenge, ensuring sufficient support for student’s psychological safety and feelings of comfort. Implications for practice are discussed.","PeriodicalId":48267,"journal":{"name":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2275519","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Authentic assessments are designed to evaluate knowledge and skills that are relevant for students’ life beyond university, emphasising practical, applied skills. They offer an alternative to assessments that don’t explicitly foster transferability of skills. The present study examined undergraduate student perceptions of authentic and traditional assessments (N = 150). We used a qualitative story completion methodology to examine three domains: student’s emotional responses to authentic and traditional assessment forms, student’s perceptions of how different assessment types may benefit their employability, and student’s preferences for pedagogical support with authentic assessments. A qualitative content analysis revealed students generally perceive authentic, novel assessments to be exciting, motivating and inspirational; however, this was accompanied by feelings of uncertainty and unfamiliarity. More traditional assessments (e.g. essays and multiple-choice-question examinations) elicited feelings of comfort and preparedness, but students also felt worried, bored and unexcited by these assessments. Students appreciated creative freedom when lecturers set traditional assessments but would like more consideration of their feelings and need for support in authentic assessments. Hence, we argue, when advocating for authentic assessment, there is a balance to be struck between innovation and challenge, ensuring sufficient support for student’s psychological safety and feelings of comfort. Implications for practice are discussed.
如何平衡教学创新与心理安全?
真实的评估旨在评估与学生大学生活相关的知识和技能,强调实用的应用技能。它们为没有明确促进技能可转移性的评估提供了另一种选择。本研究调查了本科生对真实评估和传统评估的看法(N = 150)。我们使用定性故事完成方法来检查三个领域:学生对真实和传统评估形式的情绪反应,学生对不同评估类型如何有利于其就业能力的看法,以及学生对真实评估教学支持的偏好。定性内容分析显示,学生普遍认为真实、新颖的评估令人兴奋、激励和鼓舞;然而,这伴随着不确定和不熟悉的感觉。更传统的评估(如论文和选择题考试)会让学生感到舒适和有准备,但学生也会对这些评估感到担忧、无聊和不兴奋。当讲师设定传统的评估时,学生们欣赏创造性的自由,但在真实的评估中,他们希望更多地考虑他们的感受和需要支持。因此,我们认为,在倡导真实的评估时,要在创新和挑战之间取得平衡,确保对学生心理安全和舒适感的充分支持。讨论了对实践的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
15.90%
发文量
70
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信