John Wood 2014. Part of a draft paper intended to inform the development of more ethical learning/examination procedures in universities

---

More professional criteria

Assessment in second year acknowledges continuity with the first year. All being well, second year students should have already achieved a significant level of personal self-awareness and the willingness to apply radical thinking, social and environmentally responsible thinking to their project work. In comparison with the first year assessment, the second year process would normally encourage a clearer professional context for student work. While it would acknowledge continuity with the personal self-development accomplished in year one, the assessment system is designed to reward students for working within a more pragmatic framework of learning. For example, the student might choose to establish a specific professional framework that, not only, matches his, or her, aims and aspirations but, also, demonstrates a realistic grasp of the practicalities involved.

For example:

• Students would be encouraged to aspire to, and develop, a professional role that suits their interests, career aspirations and capabilities.
• Students would be encouraged to develop his, or her, coursework in such a way that it is appropriate to his, or her, interests and ambitions.
• Students would be encouraged to choose a suitable recipient for the design ideas, submitted texts and completed project work. This person would probably be chosen in negotiation with the student's tutor, or programme leader. He, or she, should be someone who is less aware of the coursework and/or texts in question, and/or might benefit from them, and/or has a practical need for its outcome/s. Examples include:
  • A potential client who might, one day, wish to make use of the student's services.
  • Someone who is currently unaware of the student's findings and, or, capabilities and is genuinely interested in them.
  • A possible, or desirable, employer for the student, once he, or she, has graduated.
  • Someone who, through their status or power, might (hypothetically) be in a position to assist the student and, or her work, either with funding or with other resources or support.
• Second year students may like to define their context as a narrower, more specific and, pragmatic background for their coursework in question.
  • This would encourage the student to develop his, or her, work in a way that might be helpful to subsequent activities in the professional domain.

KEY	FOCUS	PLAYER	ASSESSABLE CRITERIA
A	ME	Professional self	How well did I show that I have learned from my work in year one, and have been working towards becoming an effective and responsible professional?
B	MY WORK	What I produced	How well did I show that I have developed my submitted coursework sufficiently that it will make sense within its own terms? For example, does it communicate its effectiveness to others on the basis of its clarity of purpose, usability, aesthetic appeal and/or (in the case of written work) argumentation and research?
C	CONTEXT	Background	How well did I show that my grasp of the bigger picture is sufficiently comprehensive and appropriate to makes sense within its own terms? For example, did it give me an adequate basis for considering ethical, environmental, political and entrepreneurial aspects of my work?
D	RECIPIENT	Who it was for	How well did I show that I found a suitable person to act as a recipient for my work and ideas? For example, did directing my efforts to him, or her, make sense for both of us? Did my recommendations and, or design works, impress, assist, or contribute something relevant to him, or her?
KEY	RELATION	INTERPRETATION	ASSESSABLE CRITERIA
1	A withB	In my element	How well did I show that I have acquired a suitable professional role for myself? Also, how well does it match my personal capabilities, aspirations, values, interests, curiosity, style of thinking and ways of working?
2	A withC	Depth	How well did I show that I have thought about a context that is relevant to my personal interests, yet is not too big or ambitious as to hamper my professional development?
3	B with C	Breadth	How well did I show that I am exploring and thinking about a background context that is relevant to my practical coursework, ideas and essays, etc.?
4	A with D	Rapport	How well did I show that I can relate to, empathise with, and work with, a mentor who is reasonably relevant to my capabilities, aspirations, values, interests, curiosity, style of thinking and working?
5	C with D	Empathy	How well did I show that I can understand my recipient's (i.e. client's, or reader's) perception of the context of my work?
6	B with D	Entrepreneurship	How well did I show that I can understand how interesting, effective, valuable and, or, useful my recipient (e.g. client or reader) would find the work I am doing?

---

See Iceland Assessment Outline in Year ONE
Return to Iceland Assessment System
Return to home