My primary research was a mixed method, using both quantitative and qualitative methods. In order to gain the relevant insight to answer my research question, primary research with students was required where we could ‘test’ and observe the use of the presentation assessment method. The aim was to generate understanding of how this type of ‘assessment’ made them feel. As noted within the ethics form, students from year 2 were asked to take part in their usual formative assessment – although this time the method was an in person ‘CRIT’ – which was the first time this cohort had participated in an in-person presentation and feedback session since joining LCF. The students were aware that notes would be taken by myself on the work that they were presenting …but also their overall approach to the presentation. The presentations were photographed but not filmed or recorded. (N.B All classes on this course are photographed and used for our course social media pages. Students are encouraged to capture any class or assessment activity for the course page so demonstrate their own content creation skills. Students have given prior consent to image capture during class and formative assessments)
(Image – a BA FMKCC student during her CRIT presentation)
(students observing peer presentations during the CRIT sessions)
Process and data collection
- The CRITS took place in November and students were put into small groups with fellow peers
- A schedule was created and distributed 2 weeks ahead of the CRIT
- Students were asked to contact the CL in private if there were any issues with their group (students were briefed that they may have a preference of presenting with friends or with certain group members )
- Some groups presented within a small tutorial room and some presented within a larger classroom – depending on room availability
- Ahead of the CRIT, students were briefed in person within the classroom. The briefing document was then available on moodle
- On arrival to the room, students were briefed on the process. They were informed that timer would be used to ensure we do not go over. They were advised that feedback would be from peers and tutor and that they should record feedback
- They were reassured that feedback was designed to help and would not be critical
- Observations took place by myself during the sessions to obtain behavioural data
- At the end of the session, the students were then presented with a QR code for an annoymous survey around their experience of the in person presentation
- Below is the survey and also a summary of results
(Image – screenshot of microsoft Forms survey distributed to students following their presentation)
Responses and results
- 37 year 2 students attended and presented at the CRIT
- 28 students participated in the survey
- The open ended questions (3 and 4) provided the most relevant data where students used the space to provide their feelings towards the presentation experience
- Q3 asked students what they enjoyed about the presentation experience. 54% of respondents enjoyed the feedback aspect
- With Q4 asking for their feelings on what they disliked about the experience . General nerves and anxiety was mentioned. – with 17% citing nervousness
Key insights
When reviewing all the data from this method, i noted the following insights:
- Majority of students valued the experience to some level
- Nerves were a common theme but so was rising above the nerves and feeling ok once settled
- the feedback that takes place in this format was considered very valuable and contributed to feelings of positivity towards the in person CRIT
- When questioned about seeing more in person presentation opportunities, the majority of respondents said yes – meaning that not only did the students find it a positive experience but they were open to doing more
Conclusion
To conclude, whilst the CRIT is not summative assessment and the risk is therefore lower, students embraced the opportunity to present their ideas and progress in a more animated and ‘human’ manner. As expected, nerves and anxiety dominated their initial feelings towards this kind of method. But once they had completed the task, they were able to instantly reflect positively on the experience. The sample was limited so the reliability of this research could be questioned as it could be argued that we need to meet with more cohorts on more occasions to generate sufficient data for action. But the aim was to understand this cohort’s – who were new to this form of assessment – acceptance and approach to this method and to understand if any gaps and barriers were visible. I utilised ethnography to attempt to understand and identify any behavioural differences in the different learners which is documented in a further blog post.