EBEAM: Evaluating the Benefits of Electronic Assessment Management
The EBEAM project will evaluate the impact of e-assessment and feedback on student satisfaction, retention, progression and attainment as well as on institutional efficiency. It will share recommendations for achieving high quality assessment processes, staff development, student support, sustainability, scalability and curriculum development.
Across the Higher and Further Education sectors, institutions are instigating new policies and procedures for Electronic Assessment Management (EAM). There are two main drivers behind this: increasingly vociferous student demand for better assessment experiences, especially in the context of imminent fee increases, and the push for improved quality and efficiency in academic administration. Most institutions are not in a position to build bespoke solutions and are turning to proprietary tools for which they already have a licence. iParadigms Europe is consequently experiencing a spike in interest in their GradeMark tool (part of the Turnitin suite), the licensing of which is widespread across the sectors. Whilst institutions already have the right tools, there is a pressing need to find the most efficient and effective ways to deploy them.
The University of Huddersfield is an early adopter of Turnitin for EAM across large and complex areas of its provision. Over the last four years, it has developed and implemented strategies to optimise the benefits of EAM for institutional efficiency, student satisfaction and achievement. The length of time this initiative has been running, the breadth of provision it covers and the range of quantitative and qualitative data we have available means we are uniquely and excellently placed to evaluate impact and to make transferable recommendations.
Our objectives are to answer the following two sets of evaluative research questions:
What kind of impact does EAM have on:
a. student satisfaction, retention, progression and attainment?
b. institutional efficiency and cost savings?
Which are the most effective methods for supporting EAM in terms of:
a. staff development ?
b. curriculum integration and student support?
c. supporting formative, summative, tutor, peer and self-assessment processes?
f. using diagnostic evidence to improve student skills development, achievement and satisfaction and productive iterative professional and curriculum development?
Each of these objectives is set within the work packages to be achieved at particular points within the timescale of the project.
Anticipated Outputs and Outcomes
- Evaluation Report
- Project Summary
- Implementation toolkits
- Case Studies
(For earlier documents please see the bottom of the page)
Professor Tim Thornton
Dr Cath Ellis