A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education Enhancing academic and Practice

138 ❘
Teaching, supervising, learning
(Perry, 1970; King and Kitchener, 1994). When students start degree work their aim is not
to challenge the boundaries of knowledge but to understand the discipline, join the
culture and become a fledgling historian, chemist or sociologist, much in the same way
that students following vocational courses are encouraged to begin thinking and
behaving like dentists, musicians or doctors. This may be one of the reasons why
encouraging students to reflect on their learning, particularly when they are new to degree
study, has proved difficult. There is much good advice about helping students to do this
(Brockbank and McGill, 1998; Moon, 1999), some of it involving fellow students to react
to and promote self-reflection.
2 Promotes peer and tutor dialogue around learning
The concept of dialogue between students first of all means collaborative work so that
they can share understandings of what is required. Group work is sometimes readily
embraced by students and sometimes, it has to be said, absolutely detested, but this is
usually when summative assessment is involved. To help overcome this, the first
requirement must be to ensure that the criteria by which the group is being assessed are
known by students and assessors alike. Going even further, it is desirable that the levels
of attainment leading to particular grades are also publicised. At the very least, this gives
the assessors a proper basis for discussion in the event of disagreements.
Case study 1: Development of ‘grade-related
assessment criteria’ for group projects in a
Masters of Engineering programme
Group projects occupy half of the fourth and final year of the Masters of
Engineering course at Queen Mary, University of London, and so are a significant
part of the students’ assessment. The criteria for these group projects are broader
than those of the individual projects that all engineering students undertake,
usually in their third year. They are driven to a large extent by the requirements
of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers for the accreditation of courses in
accordance with the UK Standard for Professional Engineering Competence for
Chartered Engineers. These requirements are aligned with the QAA Benchmark
Statement for Engineering. They not only place great emphasis on the graduates
having a ‘wide knowledge and comprehensive understanding of design
processes and methodologies and the ability to apply and adapt them in
unfamiliar situations’, but also on their having good transferable skills, such as
communication and teamworking.
A difficulty in formulating the criteria to meet these requirements lies in the
diverse nature of the projects being undertaken, ranging from ‘Development of
new arthroscopic meniscal repair system’, to ‘Energy and exergy balances in