Assessment Marking Amendments

Follow

Jasmine Keys

• 24 January 2023 22:31

When an assessment question's mark has been amended by a trainer (i.e. unsatisfactory to satisfactory), it would be great if a mandatory pop up would appear for the trainer to provide feedback as to why the original mark was over turned (i.e. the assessor has verbally discussed the question with the student and the student has correctly answered).

It would be a great way to ensure no information is left out and we remain compliant.

16

• 

  Pip Austin

  • 24 January 2023 22:33

  This would be good

  1

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Mark Gilmore

  • 17 January 2025 05:51

  Hi Jasmine and Pip

  I'm just going through some of the older feedback and came across this post.

  I was hoping to get some more information around this request so I can properly log this feedback and potentially add it to the roadmap as a future improvement. Any additional information you can provide will be extremely helpful 😊.

  • Can you please confirm this improvement would still be valuable given the time since you originally created this post?
  • If you had to rate this improvement against other improvements that we could make to the LMS, would you rate it as Must have, Should have or Could have?
  • Your post implies that this should occur when assessors overwrite an answer. Can I please confirm this is both for when assessors revise their original mark (on the same attempt) but also when they potentially overwrite the auto-marked result for certain questions?
  • Should this occur for both Unsatisfactory --> Satisfactory as well as Satisfactory --> Unsatisfactory
  • Would you like to see this functionality for every single assessment, or is this additional level of governance unnecessary for some assessments? i.e. we would probably need to make this a setting, do you think it would make more sense in the system settings or as an assessment task setting?

  Thanks
  Mark

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Ash Singleton

  • 17 January 2025 06:26

  Hey Mark, 
  Just thought I'd put in my 2 cents on behalf of MR. 
  Our first preference would be for this to be on self-marking assessments. Where they have overridden both the item or the overall status. 
  Example - student gets the answer close and is correct - ie. they write "40 vent tubes", when we are just looking for "40".

  Or a competency conversation is had, and they do understand overall, but the way the question was worded made them overthink it. 
  
  I would suggest it is a should or could have - we currently ask them to add notes to attempt feedback to track, but forcing this to happen would be better. 
  
  I would suggest better validation options/reports/tracking, not allowing students to submit blank answers and learning plan updates such as prereq changes are more important for our organisation than these notes. 

  1

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Pip Austin

  • 19 January 2025 23:04

  Hi Mark,

  I think this suggestion is still relevant because if an assessor amends an outcome they should be adding notes but it is hard to enforce this.

  I may be wrong but I don't believe aXcelerate currently logs when an outcome on a question or when the overall assessment outcome is adjusted within a single attempt, having the system log this as an audit trail would be good. Then a prompt for the user to add an explanation for the change to the notes section for the audit trail.

  I would put this in the Should-have category.

  I would see this being used most when an assessor overwrites the auto-marked result for certain questions, or if they are changing an outcome from a previous attempt. As Ash mentioned, they could be changing it because they discussed the answer verbally with the student and the correct answer was given verbally.

  Yes, a prompt for any change would be ideal, so both Unsatisfactory --> Satisfactory as well as Satisfactory --> Unsatisfactory.

  I would suggest having the ability to add this at the assessment type and assessment level rather than the system setting because no doubt there will be some unintended issues for the trainers that we cannot predict.

  As Ash also said there are probably other projects that would have more benefit, I would like better reporting and validation options at an assessment level rather than the current assessment instance because we have too many instances for that to provide us with the data we need easily.

  Hopefully, this has been helpful.

  1

  Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.