ksibia's blog

While reading Dimensions of Assessment (Anon, no date), I found myself reflecting on the definitions of formative and summative assessment and how they apply to my own teaching practice. I had always considered summative assessments as a way to evaluate student learning but had not fully acknowledged them as a moment of feedback for myself as a tutor. The reading prompted me to consider how summative assessment can serve as a reflective tool—an opportunity to critically examine my teaching and identify areas for development.

Although I had been subconsciously engaging in this process, I realised I had not been intentional in carving out time to assess my approach. Brookhart (2017) suggests that assessment should be viewed not only as a means of evaluating students but also as a tool for informing and refining pedagogical methods. With this in mind, I took the opportunity to reflect on recently completed summative assessments and identified recurring misunderstandings in student work. These commonalities suggested that certain concepts may not have been communicated as effectively as intended.

One key observation was the potential misalignment in teaching between myself and my co-tutor, who supports students in translating their ideas into drawings. It became clear that some students may have lacked clarity on fundamental aspects, perhaps assuming that each of us had addressed topics the other had not. This aligns with Boud and Falchikov’s (2006) argument that assessment is most effective when it fosters dialogue between educators and enables shared responsibility in the learning process. Consequently, I initiated a discussion with my co-tutor to clarify our respective roles, ensuring that we develop a more cohesive approach moving forward.

By integrating self-assessment into my teaching practice, I aim to make more intentional adjustments to better support my students. As Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) argue, assessment should not merely be an endpoint but a process that enhances learning, both for students and educators alike.

References

Anon (no date) Dimensions of Assessment. [No publisher information available].

Boud, D. and Falchikov, N. (2006) ‘Aligning assessment with long-term learning’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), pp. 399–413.

Brookhart, S. M. (2017) How to Use Grading to Improve Learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Nicol, D. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) ‘Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice’, Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp. 199–218.

During workshop 2 we reviewed several aphorisms and I particularly resonated with the following from Paulo Freire:

“Education does not change the world.
Education changes people.
People change the world.” (Freire, 1970)

This quote encapsulates my belief in the transformative power of education not as an external force that imposes change on the world, but as something that shapes the individual first. I am drawn to this idea because I recognise that each person processes information and experiences differently. Even if we are all provided the same education, the way in which it is internalised and acted upon is unique to each individual. In turn, these personal transformations are what ultimately influence and shape the world around us.

In reflecting on how this idea impacts my teaching, I see it as central to the way I encourage students to approach their work. I always invite them to bring their personal experiences, passions, and perspectives into their projects. This focus on individuality is something I have come to recognise as quite different from the norm in many academic settings, where there is often an emphasis on standardisation. My background in industry, particularly in my work on social change through the creation of meaningful, inclusive spaces, has further reinforced this belief.

I strongly believe that by centring one’s self in the process of spatial design, we unlock deeper conversations around human experience. When students can relate personally to their work, the dialogue becomes more meaningful and authentic. It takes the conversation beyond theory and onto a more human level. However, this approach can be challenging for some students. In my experience, many come from educational environments where reflection on the self and one’s individual needs has not been prioritised. As Freire notes, education that encourages critical thinking about one’s own role in the world can lead to a deeper engagement with both the self and the broader society (Freire, 1970; Nicol, 2010).

In essence, education that fosters personal reflection and individual empowerment can be a powerful catalyst for change—both within the classroom and in the world beyond.

References

Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Continuum.

Nicol, D. (2010) From Monologue to Dialogue: Improving Student Engagement with Feedback. Higher Education, 59(2), pp. 35-47.

When I first started engaging with the concept of learning outcomes, it came at a time when I was myself juggling assessments, struggling with how to review creative student work against sometimes rigid and unrelated criteria. I began questioning whether these learning outcomes were limiting the students’ creativity or providing them with just enough of a framework to address the brief, all while allowing room for individual expression.

In reflecting on this, I wondered whether the learning outcomes had restricted my students’ freedom to fully explore their ideas, or if they were merely providing a scaffold that allowed them to demonstrate how they were engaging with the brief in their own way. This balance between structure and flexibility is something that has often made me pause. Addison (2014) writes about the paradox of learning outcomes in creative fields – they’re meant to guide student learning, but too often end up restricting creativity. It’s an issue that resonates with me as I see my students try to align their work with these outcomes, sometimes at the cost of their own creative expression.

A real turning point for me came during Workshop 3, when a colleague from UAL’s academic support team introduced a helpful framework for breaking down the language of learning outcomes. The exercise focused on the nouns at the start of each outcome, and how we could deconstruct them into four key parts: Topic, Instruction, Aspect, and Restriction. This approach gave me much-needed clarity, as it helped me understand exactly what was being asked of students in a more detailed way. By breaking things down like this, I could see how the learning outcomes weren’t meant to be restrictive but more of a guide that could be interpreted more flexibly within the creative context of my course.

Reflecting on this shift in understanding, I’ve gained a new appreciation for the learning outcomes at UAL. What I now value most is how my course leader and fellow tutors approach these outcomes in a more holistic way, allowing students more freedom in how they demonstrate their learning. This resonates with what Davies (2012) argues about the assessment of art and design, where a more flexible approach to learning outcomes is necessary, given the subjective nature of creative work. In this sense, the outcomes act as a guide but shouldn’t box in the creative process. They offer a framework, but there’s room for students to express their learning in their own way.

My time in industry has likely influenced my perspective, where grading is often complemented by portfolio reviews and interviews, which help provide a fuller picture of an individual’s capabilities. However, I now see that this type of assessment model isn’t always suitable for every subject or unit brief. Conversations with colleagues made me realise how fields like fine art or illustration may need a more open approach to learning outcomes that fosters freedom and personal exploration. The constraints of overly rigid criteria can stifle the creative process in such subjects.

In conclusion, my reflections on learning outcomes have led me to recognise their important role in assessment, particularly when they are used as part of a flexible and holistic approach. While learning outcomes can feel restrictive in creative fields, I now understand that, when implemented thoughtfully, they can serve as a useful guide without limiting the creative potential of students.

References

Addison, N. (2014) Doubting Learning Outcomes. London: Routledge.

Davies, J. (2012) ‘Learning Outcomes in Art and Design: A Constructive Approach to Assessment’, Journal of Art and Design Education, 31(2), pp. 179-189.