Programme-focused assessment

Assessment design is central to the goal of transforming assessment in order to have a positive impact on student learning outcomes and experience while also enhancing academic standards. This requires that “assessment methods are diversified to improve their validity, authenticity and inclusivity, making them clearly relevant and worthwhile in the eyes of students and firmly focused on assessing programme level outcomes. Relatedly, grading concentrates on fewer and more challenging summative assessments… and there would be an increase in truly formative assessment that is thoroughly integrated with teaching and learning” (Elkington, 2020, p.6). 

A Programme-Focused Assessment approach therefore “shifts the balance away from assessment at the module level and emphasises the holistic coherence of the learning experience in the design of the curriculum, teaching and assessment and feedback” (ibid. p.7) across the whole course. Consequently, “the assessment is likely to be more authentic and meaningful to students, staff and external stakeholders” (ibid., p.8), and have a close relationship with sector-related practices.  

The importance of adopting a programme-focused approach has been established by extensive educational research (e.g. Hartley & Whitfield, 2012; Jessop et al, 2014; Jessop and Tomas, 2017; Jessop, 2019) that has revealed a number of issues resulting from a narrower focus on module-level assessment rather than on adopting a course-wide perspective, namely: 

• “high summative assessment loads;  
• low ratios of formative assessment, often weakly implemented;  
• disconnected, one-off feedback which often does not feed forward; 
• weak conceptions of standards by students;  
• a transmission model of assessment and feedback” (Jessop 2019, p.37). 

In adopting a programme-focused approach, we need to take cognisance that:  

• modular structures may “have implications for assessment which undermine particular strategies. For example, the development of slowly learnt aspects of ‘graduateness' such as academic literacies may be lost, ignored or only serendipitously acquired within fragmented course structures” (Hartley and Whitfield, 2012, p.8); 
• the dominance of modular-based assessment has “precluded forms of assessment outside strict module boundaries” (ibid., p.9); 
• while lecturers have been critical of the restrictions that the modular system has placed on assessment practice (ibid, p.9), at same time, it has been observed that “[a]cademics are often reluctant to reduce summative assessment because it acts as a pedagogy of control [italics added], triggering student effort” (Jessop, 2019, p. 43) - as opposed to a pedagogy that favours “assessment as learning” (see section on Purposes of Assessment) and invites creativity in assessment (see section on Creativity in Assessment); 
• conversely, a proliferation of formative assessments with small marks awarded can also lead to over-assessing in some modules. 

Programme assessment design strategies found to have helped students to learn include: 

• “reducing the number of summative assessments to one per module across the whole programme;  
• simultaneously increasing formative to two or three required tasks per module;  
• linking formative and summative tasks so that students can use the feedback to improve their graded assessment;  
• sequencing assessment tasks and varieties of assessment across the whole programme;  
• building more integration between assessment tasks, so that students see the connections between knowledge and learning on one module and another” (Jessop, 2019, p.43). 

Authentic assessment is also central to PFA, especially one aimed at fostering overall graduate attributes and employability. As Jessop (2019) clarifies, “[a]uthentic assessment mirrors practice in the profession or discipline so that students see how knowledge is generated and disseminated within their field. Authentic assessment reduces the number of artificial assessment types. More than that, it casts students as inquirers and problem solvers, by constructing scenarios and ill-defined problems, sometimes working with students to co-create scenarios which become the scene of learning – formatively or summatively” (p.43).   

PFA also requires giving attention to integrative assessment, defined as “assessment design that seeks to combine students’ learning from multiple modules and/or levels into a single assessment. Such assessments are synoptic, meaning that students are required to make connections between knowledge and learning that span multiple modules and topics” (Allan, 2021, p.1). Crucially, integrative assessment “enable students to demonstrate learning against programme level outcomes more readily than through atomised modular assessment regimes, enabling the evidencing of knowledge and understanding with breadth and depth of the subject” (ibid.). 

Main types of integrative assessment, as identified by Hartley and Whitfield, 2012 , include: 

• “Assessment by submission of personal evidence against programme learning outcomes: In order to pass the programme, students submit work (often in the form of a portfolio) which demonstrates that they satisfy all the learning outcomes which have been specified at programme.  
• Final, heavily weighted integrative assessment: As a major (but not necessarily the total) part of the final programme assessment, students complete assessments that demonstrate they satisfy all the learning outcomes which have been specified at programme level.  
• Integrative level/year assessment: As part of the overall programme assessment, students complete assessments that demonstrate they satisfy all the learning outcomes which have been specified for one level/year of the programme (horizontal), or more than one level/year of the programme (vertical).  
• Integrative semester/term assessment: As part of the overall programme assessment, students complete assessments that demonstrate they satisfy all the learning outcomes which have been specified for one semester/term of the programme” (pp.19-20). 

For instance, to demonstrate achievement of programme (course) learning outcomes, students could produce a synoptic capstone project, exhibition, artefact or portfolio - with creative freedom to capture their integrated learning in various ways (e.g. blog, wiki, scrapbook, video diary, shoebox, digital story, slide show, website) - see exemplar by Jackson and Willis (2018). 

For examples of horizontal and vertical integrative assessment see McDowell (2012) Programme Focused Assessment: A Short Guide (p.3). 

An effective model of a synoptic method is patchwork assessment, involving a cumulative set or variety of (formative) assessment tasks (“patches”) which are then “stitched together” to produce a critically reflective summative account that synthesises the learning gained. 

See the Patchwork Assessment Practice Guide (Jones-Devitt, Lawton and Mayne, 2016) offering educators guidance on how to develop and implement patchwork assessment processes across a range of areas.  

It is also important that 

• students are helped to reflect on their active learning across a whole programme;  
• “programme-level guidance and support is provided to each student to help them engage effectively with different forms of feedback at each level of their studies” (Elkington, 2020, p. 17). 

As already noted, a common challenge with the modular system, where modules are treated as separate siloes, is that “feedback does not easily connect with learning on the next module. Helping students to use their feedback involves demonstrating how assessment and feedback connects between tasks” (Jessop, 2019, p.46). Hence, PFA “offers a vehicle to more explicitly promote responsibility sharing in assessment feedback… supporting students to actively seek out and make use of feedback, rather than receive it passively” (Elkington, 2020, p.9).  

Effective strategies for connecting assessment feedback across the course could include: 

• “requiring students to reflect on ‘ways to improve’ feedback from past assessments when submitting new ones;  

• creative approaches to helping students synthesise feedback from multiple assessment tasks across modules, including creating word clouds which highlight strong messages” (Jessop, 2019, p. 46). 

Encapsulating all the above, salient guiding principles for a “programme focus” in assessment and feedback practice have been articulated by Lancaster University: 

• “An emphasis on programmatic and discipline-level thinking for assessment and feedback that enhances the learning experience of a diverse student population. 
• The adoption of authentic assessment approaches which are congruent with programme aims, enabling students to demonstrate how they have met disciplinary learning outcomes. 
• A programme-level assessment and feedback strategy that supports and integrates learning across the programme and its modules. 
• Assessment that adopts an anticipatory approach during the design phase. This involves devising assessment strategies that are inclusive or that offer equitable alternatives, reducing the need for reasonable adjustments. 
• Active collaboration with students and other stakeholders during the assessment design process” (Lancaster University Assessment Principles - see Principle 1). 

Designing new courses or reviewing current ones provides opportunities for adopting PFA, in which key considerations, as Allan (2021) proposes, include: 

• work as a team: the collaboration of the whole team is critical so that module leaders “can understand and influence the relationships between individual modules and the whole programme”; 
• rethink assessment effort: workload benefits could be achieved from investing in PFA, such as “direct efficiency if the overall number of modules and/or summative assessments reduces or “work is rebalanced towards more productive feedback dialogue with students”; 
• refresh the approach: explore ideas for “supporting integrative approaches across multiple modules”, such as the introduction of “assessment modules” at various levels of study, similar to existing major projects or dissertation modules; 
• talk to your students: it is essential to engage students both “to gain clear insight into how assessment regimes (especially across a whole programme) are actually perceived and experienced” and to work with as partners in the re/design of assessment and feedback (also see section on Students as Partners in Assessment); 

• be creative: while assessment regulations help to ensure robust standards, it is also important to clarify how they may be “permissive of innovative and flexible programme focused assessment patterns” (also see sections on Diversifying Assessment and Creativity in Assessment). 

A helpful exercise to support PFA is course assessment mapping, a process that involves mapping modular assessments across a programme and against the course learning outcomes - for example, where are required competencies introduced, practised and assessed? - looking to see where assessment overload and bunching could be reduced, and where coherence, continuity and integration of assessment and feedback could be enhanced from a programme perspective.  Assessment data from London Met across the various Schools shows that where there are concentrations of overlapping assessment deadlines, there is an increase in student non-submission - a key challenge that invites careful assessment scheduling across the course. 

See the quick guide by Sambell et al (2018) on Meeting the Challenges of Programme Focused Assessment. 

Elkington (2020) offers the following prompt questions for course teams regarding “taking a programme view” (p.18). 

1. Do you clearly articulate the rationale for, and approaches to, assessment and feedback for students at each level of study in programme documentation?
2. Do you make assessment decisions in relation to design, development and variety within a programme context, focusing on programme learning outcomes? 
3. Are you encouraging students to engage and participate in assessment design decisions within the wider context of a discipline and/or professional community? 
4. Is particular attention paid to the issue of equity in assessment timing, spread and loading at programme level when designing assessment? 
5. To what extent are you encouraging students to actively engage with assessment standards within the discourses and practices appropriate to specific disciplines and professions? 
6. Are you implementing and supporting ‘programmatic’ approaches to assessment feedback that promote regular use of formative assessments and dialogue between staff and students? 
7. To what extent are you actively and consistently involving students in the clarification of the different forms and sources of feedback available to them? 
8. How are you promoting an assessment culture that encourages colleagues to substantiate their professional judgments collaboratively through open and honest discussions?

Alan, S. (2021) Programme-focused assessment (Educational Development Team, Lancaster University).

Elkington, S. and Evans. C. (2017) Transforming Assessment in Higher Education - A Case Studies Series (Advance HE) - case studies on assessment design.  

Elkington, S. (2020) Essential frameworks for enhancing student success: Transforming Assessment in Higher Education (Advance HE). 

Hartley, P. and Whitfield, R. (2012) Programme Assessment Strategies (University of Bradford). 

Jackson, N. and Willis, J. (2018) on the use of open-ended portfolios in a Lifewide Learning Award scheme, in the issue on “Developing creative practice from induction to assessment” (Guest Editor, Sandra Sinfield), Creative Academic Magazine, 10 (1), pp. 21-25. 

Jessop, T. and Tomas, C. (2017) The implications of programme assessment patterns for student learning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42 (6): 990–999.  

Jessop, T., El Hakim, Y., Gibbs, G. (2014) The whole is greater than the sum of its parts: a large-scale study of student’s learning in response to different programme assessment patterns. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39 (1): 73–88. 

Jessop, T. (2019) Changing the narrative. A programme approach to assessment through TESTA, in C.Bryan and K. Clegg (eds.) Innovative Assessment in Higher Education.

A Handbook for Academic Practitioners (2nd edition). London: Routledge. DOI Innovative Assessment in Higher Education. 

Jones-Devitt, S., Lawton, M.  and Mayne, W. (2016) Patchwork Assessment Practice Guide (Higher Education Academy, now Advance HE). 

Lancaster University (n.d.) Assessment Principles. 

McDowell, L. (2012) Programme Focused Assessment: A Short Guide (University of Bradford). 

Sambell, K., Brown, S. and Race, P. (2018?) Meeting the Challenges of Programme Focused Assessment (Heriot-Watt University).