Tag Archives: Assessment

Deconstructing “Authentic” Assessment⤴

Introduction

I was recently asked for my opinion about on-site, situated assessment—the type of assessment its disciples call "authentic".

This post argues that the concept of "authentic" assessment is a philosophical contradiction, a contradiction that becomes clear when we understand that any assessment, simulated or otherwise, can have no reality beyond its own constructed text. I'll explore how this fundamental insight, rooted in the work of Jacques Derrida, reveals a deep flaw in the "authentic" assessment approach to educational evaluation, a flaw that is both philosophical and profoundly human.

Derrida's famous aphorism, ‘il n'y a pas de hors-texte’, (‘there is nothing outside the text’) is usually applied to questions in literature and philosophy. I argue that educational assessments operate in this way. The moment we bring in a third-party observer into the workplace, the work is immediately reframed. A rubric is set, a time limit is imposed, and a specific task is assigned; in that moment, the real world ceases to be the subject. The subject becomes a constructed simulation, a text to be read and evaluated.

This dynamic creates a profound identity crisis for the apprentice, whose professional being is destabilized by a new, spectral identity as a “candidate”. Derrida's philosophy, in the reading of Dooley and Kavanagh, is fundamentally concerned with the related questions of memory and identity. It is a philosophical landscape haunted by ghosts and spectres, traces, ashes and mourning.

The destabilization of the apprentice's identity, this haunting, rooted in Derrida's concept of hauntology, is summoned by the assessor’s gaze. It is a presence that problematizes the apprentice’s being, ensuring that the individual is no longer a single, coherent being but a paradoxical blend of two conflicting identities, the candidate/apprentice. While the assessor's gaze reads a performance, the master electrician's gaze, in complete contrast, is a pedagogical one, and this distinction is where we find the true essence of authenticity—not in a test, but in a tradition.

The Apprentice Electrician as Assessor's "Text"

When assessing a candidate in a simulated environment, say, on their ability to test a lighting system, the specific test results don't matter in the same way that the results matter on-site. What matters in the assessment are the procedures and actions that the candidate performs. The candidate, in the simulated assessment, is not testing the circuit, but is instead performing through their actions that they know how to test the circuit. And in this regard, their actions are as much a simulation of testing as the environment is itself simulated. Their performance is judged on criteria like the settings of the test meter, and whether the test is carried out from the correct part of the circuit. They are, in other words, assessed according to the assessment rubric, and not on whether the installation wiring is up to scratch. The entire scenario is a contrived representation of reality, designed for the sole purpose of evaluation.

This arrangement ensures that the environment is safe for the candidate to perform and more importantly make mistakes without putting either themselves or the assessor at risk of danger. The assessment can reliably be taken at any centre with any assessor because the simulation is reproducible. The assessment takes place in a controlled environment free from the noise and distractions of a construction site. All the real-world messiness of an electrical installation on a site is cleared away to ensure that the simulated assessment only assesses the candidate's performance ensuring that the assessment has validity. Taking place in a test centre, the assessment is practicable and manageable in terms of bookings and staffing levels. And with all those controls in place, the assessor can concentrate on reading the candidate's actions as if they were reading a text. The candidate's actions are not real work but are instead signs to be interpreted by the assessor. There is no reality to the candidate's performance outside the text of the assessment rubric.

This philosophical error is somewhat paradoxical because the flaw in the “authentic” assessment is that it lacks genuine authenticity. The candidate still has to meet a constructed assessment criteria and it is the assessor’s reading of what is observed, and not the electrician's, that decides how the candidate has performed. It is, in other words, no more "authentic" than the simulation.

Perhaps even more than that, because there is a profound irony here. By its very nature, a situated, so-called "authentic" assessment takes place in the workplace. It is a disruption to the quotidian, the ordinary, the expected. It is a pre-planned, pre-scribed event that interrupts the flow of the workplace and imposes an external frame of scrutiny onto an organic process. To quote Derrida's friend, Emmanuel Lévinas, the workplace suffers 'an abrupt invasion' such that the space the assessor enters ceases to be: the workplace ceases to be a workplace. And, in this respect, there is nothing more inauthentic in the workplace than an "authentic" assessment.

The Haunted Identity of the Apprentice

Why summon hauntology to discuss authenticity in assessment? By melding haunting with ontology Derrida reconceptualises ghosts as spectres who disturb notions of time and history, blurring distinctions between the present, past, and future. Spectres also problematize being and non-being—they are paradoxically present but absent, unsettling conventional categories of what is real and what is not.

Thus begins Carmen Vallis’ paper which uses Derrida's concept of hauntology to trouble the idea of "authentic" assessment, framing it as a ‘spectre of lost futures’.

The apprentice is a professional-in-training. On-site, they are what they seem to be; their identity set in a practical, day-to-day sense; a shared, recognized identity within the community of practice. But the moment they enter an assessment, their identity as an apprentice is joined by a new, paradoxical identity that of the “candidate”.

This new identity is a kind of spectre; present, but not fully real, one that, as Vallis' paper points out, "problematises being and non-being". The apprentice is still an apprentice, but their professional being is now haunted by this other non-being of candidate, both, as Dooley and Kavanagh put it, ‘belonging and non-belonging, reducible to neither one nor the other’. We can formulate this dyad as the candidate/apprentice. The single word "apprentice" unable to exist without the trace of “candidate”. Both in a state of constant deferral.

In this haunting, the identity of the individual becomes fundamentally non-coherent. The apprentice's being is defined by their work, their relationship with the master electrician, their place within the grading structure. The candidate's identity, however, is inseparable from the assessment's rubric, the assessor's gaze, and the need to perform for a grade. These two identities exist simultaneously but can never truly merge or cohere into a unified whole.

Denial of the Spectre

This is where a more profound philosophical error lies. The advocates of "authentic"assessment seek to deny the existence of this spectral identity altogether. Like Hamlet asking Horatio, "Do you see it?" the answer that advocates of "authentic"assessment want to hear is "no," because that denial allows them to claim that the assessment is a pure, unmediated reflection of the apprentice's true being.

This haunting occurs irrespective of the simulated or situated nature of the assessment. The assessor's gaze is what summons this spectre. The assessor isn't just observing the candidate/apprentice's actions; they are reading them through the lens of an educational text. This gaze transforms the apprentice's professional identity into an academic one, a paradox that exists only within the contrived space of the assessment. Derrida's theory of hauntology lifts the visor of this ghostly presence to reveal that the "authentic" assessment is no more real than a simulated one.

It is the same with "authentic" assessment advocates who try to solve the problem of non-coherence with a separate, flawed act of coherence: equating the "authentic" with the real. A critical point to understand here is that a simulated assessment cannot be said to lack authenticity because it can never possess it. It is not a poor imitation of the real world; it is an entirely separate system with its own logic and its own text. A simulation's purpose is not to replicate reality but to create a controlled environment where a specific, pre-determined set of skills can be observed and evaluated against a specific rubric. The simulation is what it is—a text of a test—and pretending it is anything other than what it is in order to criticize what it cannot have is an act of bad educational faith.

But "authentic" assessment does more than simply deny the presence of the spectre. It seeks to magic its paradoxes away using the power of words. Its very name an incantation, a prayer, a spell. By calling itself "authentic”, the term attempts a deliberate act of concealment. The name itself is a kind of declarative magic, seeking to make real what is only an illusion. It is a linguistic sleight of hand that tries to erase the very spectre it summoned. By naming the assessment as authentic, we are led to believe that its reality is a given and that it has an outside to which it can be compared. But this is a flawed premise. The name is not a description of a quality; it is a declaration of a belief, an attempt to make a phantom cohere through an act of language.

The Electrician's Gaze: A Pedagogical Act

The gaze of “the other” signifies an ethical and existential encounter with a perspective beyond one's own. While the educational assessor's gaze haunts the apprentice by transforming them into a candidate, the master electrician's gaze does different work.

When I was an apprentice, I remember wanting to see my journeyman smile, acknowledge my work and realize that I respected him and his teaching enough to want to reproduce it. I wanted to see him see that I was learning and doing well. But the smile that I wanted to see wasn't just a mark of approval; it was a confirmation that I was becoming successfully initiated into a community of practice. The apprentice wants to see the journeyman's smile because that acknowledgment is a two-way sign of respect, and a confirmation that they are successfully learning to reproduce the master's craft.

This gaze is part of a shared text—the tradition of the trade itself. It is not there to judge against a rubric, but to guide, teach, and provide a model. This pedagogical gaze is a gaze of mentorship and acknowledgment. The apprentice is not performing for a grade; they are participating in a conversation that has been going on for generations. This is the un-haunted form of assessment, where the performance is not judged against a pre-written text, but is becoming part of a living one. And whilst all assessment is a form of reading, the master electrician's gaze is one of mentorship and tradition, whilst the educational assessor's is one of cold, bureaucratic scrutiny. What the assessor sees, all that the assessor sees, is the performance of the haunted candidate/apprentice. It is disingenuous to regard these identities, these differences, to be coherent or reconcilable.

Conclusion

As soon as an assessment rubric is in play the apprentice is haunted by the spectre of being a candidate. This happens irrespective of whether the apprentice is in a college classroom, an assessment centre, or if an assessor assesses them on-site. There is no escaping the fact that all assessments are essentially inauthentic. We cannot escape the reality that any assessment, simulated or otherwise, is a constructed system. The frame is inseparable from the assessor's gaze. When that frame is established, there is no outside of it—and huis clos, no way out. An assessment is not merely an observation; it is a complex, closed system of evaluation. To argue otherwise is at best naive and, at worst, dishonest.

References

Mark Dooley, 'The Surprising Conservatism of Jacques Derrida', The European Conservative, https://europeanconservative.com/articles/essay/the-surprising-conservatism-of-jacques-derrida/, accessed 20th August 2025

Mark Dooley and Liam Kavanagh, (2007) The Philosophy of Derrida, Abingdon , Routledge

Carmen Vallis (2025) ‘Authentic assessment in higher education: the spectre of lost futures’, Teaching in Higher Education, 30:3, 744-751, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2024.2362217

Episode #190 (26 December 2022) - Deconstructing Derrida: A Dialogue with Peter Salmon by Converging Dialogues on Audible. https://www.audible.co.uk/pd/B0BR4CTH5Q?source_code=ORGOR69210072400FU, accessed 21st August 2025

Peter Salmon (2021) An Event, Perhaps: A Biography of Jacques Derrida, London, Verso

Image Credits

Gisela Giardino, Derrida at Jorge Luis Borges´ home in Buenos Aires, 1995, uploaded to Wikimedia Commons on 12th October 2004, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jaques_Derrida_(cropped).jpg, CC-A-SA 2.0 Generic, (accessed 25th August 2025)

Hamlet, Horatio, Marcellus and the Ghost (Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 4), print, Robert Thew, after Henry Fuseli, uploaded to Wikimedia Commons on 11th July 2017, This file was donated to Wikimedia Commons as part of a project by the Metropolitan Museum of Art, CC0 1.0, https://share.google/WTpf9JyXlEcycvQQq, accessed 26th August 2024

Deconstructing “Authentic” Assessment: The Problem with ‘Real’ Assessments⤴

from Blue Collar

I was recently asked for my opinion on on-site, situated assessment—the type of assessment its disciples call "authentic." This post argues that the concept of authentic assessment is a philosophical contradiction, a contradiction that becomes clear when we understand that any assessment, simulated or otherwise, can have no reality beyond its own constructed text. I'll explore how this fundamental insight, rooted in the work of the French philosopher, Jacques Derrida, reveals a deeper flaw in our approach to educational evaluation, a flaw that is both philosophical and profoundly human.

Derrida's famous aphorism, "il n'y a pas de hors-texte," ("there is nothing outside the text") is usually applied to literature and philosophy. I argue that educational assessments operate in this way. The moment we bring in a third-party observer, the work is immediately reframed. A rubric is set, a time limit is imposed, and a specific task is assigned; in that moment, the real world ceases to be the subject. The subject becomes a constructed simulation, a text to be read and evaluated.

This dynamic creates a profound identity crisis for the apprentice, whose professional being is destabilized by a new, spectral identity as a candidate. This haunting, rooted in Derrida's concept of hauntology, is summoned by the assessor’s gaze. It is a presence that problematizes the apprentice’s being, ensuring that the individual is no longer a single, coherent being but a paradoxical blend of two conflicting identities. While the assessor's gaze reads a performance, the master electrician's gaze, in complete contrast, is a pedagogical one, and this distinction is where we find the true essence of authenticity—not in a test, but in a tradition.

The Apprentice Electrician as Assessor's "Text"

Imagine an apprentice is being assessed in a simulated environment on their ability to test a lighting system. The specific test result figures don't matter. What matters are the procedures and actions that the apprentice follows. The candidate, in the simulated assessment, is not testing the circuit, but is instead demonstrating through their actions that they know how to test the circuit. Their actions are as much a part of the simulation of testing as the environment is itself simulated. Their performance is judged on criteria like the settings of the test meter, and whether the test is carried out from the correct part of the circuit. They are, in other words, assessed according to the assessment rubric, and not on whether the installation wiring is up to scratch. The entire scenario is a contrived representation of reality, designed for the sole purpose of evaluation. This ensures that the environment is safe for the candidate to perform and more importantly make mistakes without putting either themselves or the assessor at risk of danger. The assessment can reliably be taken at any centre with any assessor because the simulation is reproducible. The assessment takes place in a controlled environment free from the noise and distractions of a site. All the real-world messiness of an electrical installation on a site is cleared away to ensure that the simulated assessment only assesses the candidate's performance ensuring that the assessment has validity. Taking place in a test centre it is both practicable and manageable in terms of bookings and staffing levels. And with all those controls in place, the assessor can concentrate on reading the candidate's actions as if they were reading a text. The apprentice's actions are not real work but are instead signs to be interpreted by the assessor. There is no reality to the candidate's performance outside the text of the assessment rubric.

A critical point to understand is that a simulated assessment cannot be said to lack authenticity because it can never possess it. It is not a poor imitation of the real world; it is an entirely separate system with its own logic and its own text. A simulation's purpose is not to replicate reality but to create a controlled environment where a specific, pre-determined set of skills can be observed and evaluated against a specific rubric. The simulation is what it is—a text of a test—and pretending it is anything less or more in order to criticize what it cannot have is a fundamental category error.

Now imagine the same apprentice is undertaking the same assessment on-site under the watchful gaze of an assessor. The assessment rubric remains exactly the same but the environment is no longer under the control of the assessor. The circuit, unlike the simulation, is now being tested by an unskilled person but unlike a genuinely real situation, the apprentice cannot ask their supervising electrician for support. In the simulation, an error makes no difference to the safety of the circuit since the issue is the apprentice's abilities that are assessed. In the situated assessment, it is the apprentice and the circuit that are being tested. If the apprentice does something wrong in the simulation the assessment does not grind to a halt. However, with a real, untested circuit the assessment cannot proceed if tests are required to be repeated following the rectification of any faults. But aside from the now diluted assessment principles of reliability, validity, practicability, manageability and possibly fairness there is a more profound philosophical error at the core of the "authentic"assessment which is that it lacks genuine authenticity. The candidate still has to meet a constructed assessment criteria and it is the assessor’s reading of what is observed, and not the electrician's, that decides how the candidate has performed. It is, in other words, no more "authentic"than the simulation.

Perhaps, even more than that. There is a profound irony here. By its very nature, a so-called "authentic" assessment is a disruption to the quotidian, the ordinary, the expected. It is a pre-planned, pre-scribed event that interrupts the flow of the workplace and imposes an external frame of scrutiny onto an organic process. To quote Derrida's friend, Emmanuel Lévinas, the workplace suffers 'an abrupt invasion' such that the space the assessor enters ceases to be. And so, in this respect, there is nothing more inauthentic in the workplace than an "authentic" assessment.

As an analogy, one might liken the situation to the role of the observer in quantum physics in which the very act of observing a system changes it. Particles that exist in a state of potentiality (superposition) collapse into a definite state (a specific location, for example) once they are measured or observed. In a way, the apprentice's performance exists in a state of potentiality until the assessor's gaze collapses the waveform of their actions into a specific, measurable result. There is no getting around this conundrum: that the situation becomes in"authentic"as soon as an assessor is introduced into the equation. The assessor isn't a neutral party simply observing a real task; their presence fundamentally alters the reality of the task itself, making it a text to be read and evaluated. The apprentice/candidate's actions aren't, therefore, natural expressions of their skill; they are a performance in a constructed environment, influenced and defined by the fact that they are being observed and evaluated.

The Haunted Identity of the Apprentice

Now seems an appropriate moment to ask about the identity of the individual whose performance is being assessed.

Why summon hauntology to discuss authenticity in assessment? The idea of melding haunting with ontology comes from philosopher Jacques Derrida. He reconceptualizes ghosts as spectres who disturb notions of time and history, blurring distinctions between the present, past, and future. Spectres also problematize being and non-being—they are paradoxically present but absent, unsettling conventional categories of what is real and what is not.

Thus begins Carmen Vallis’ paper which uses Derrida's concept of hauntology to trouble the idea of "authentic"assessment, framing it as a "spectre of lost futures".

The apprentice is a professional-in-training. On-site, they are what they seem to be: an apprentice; their identity set in a practical, day-to-day sense. It is a shared, un-problematized identity within the community of practice. There is no debate about who they are; their being is defined by their work, their relationship with the master electrician, their place within the grading structure. But the moment they enter a simulated assessment, their identity as an apprentice is joined by a new, paradoxical identity as a candidate. The moment the assessment begins, stability is gone.

This new identity is a kind of spectre; present, but not fully real. The apprentice still is an apprentice, but their professional being is now haunted by this other non-being of being a candidate. This is not a malicious haunting, but one that, as Derrida describes, destabilizes the normal state of being. We can formulate this as the candidate/apprentice. The single word "apprentice" cannot now exist without the trace of “candidate”. The individual's identity is no longer a stable, singular thing but a paradoxical blend of two conflicting beings that can never fully merge.

In this haunting, the identity of the individual becomes fundamentally non-coherent. The apprentice's professional identity is inseparable from the work itself, their actions, their tools, and the real-world consequences of their work. The candidate's identity, however, is inseparable from the assessment's rubric, the assessor's gaze, and the need to perform for a grade. These two identities exist simultaneously but can never truly merge or cohere into a unified whole. They are in a state of constant deferral. The apprentice is always and already in the process of becoming, but in the assessment, they are temporarily frozen in the state of being a candidate.

The Denial of the Spectre

This is where a more profound philosophical error lies. The advocates of "authentic"assessment seek to deny the existence of this spectral identity altogether. It's a refusal to acknowledge the ghost in the machine. Hamlet asking Horatio, "Do you see it?" The answer that advocates of "authentic"assessment want to hear is "no," because that denial allows them to claim that the assessment is a pure, unmediated reflection of the apprentice's true being.

A useful analogy is provided by Peter Salmon. A reality-based TV show on the renovation of an abandoned property is given narrative coherence, from ruin to beautiful home, by the artificial use of editing. Anyone pretending that the programme is a genuinely true picture of reality would clearly be recognized as someone trying to deceive.

It is the same with "authentic"assessment advocates who try to solve the problem of non-coherence with a separate, flawed act of coherence: equating the "authentic"with the real. But the assessment's frame and the assessor's gaze remain unchanged, ensuring the spectre's presence. It is, in essence, a futile attempt to solve a philosophical problem with a sleight of hand.

This haunting occurs irrespective of the simulated or situated nature of the assessment. The assessor's gaze is what summons this spectre. The assessor isn't just observing the apprentice's actions; they are reading them through the lens of a pedagogical text. This gaze transforms the apprentice's professional identity into an academic one, a paradox that exists only within the contrived space of the assessment. Derrida's theory of hauntology lifts the visor of this ghostly presence to reveal that the situated assessment is no more real than the simulated assessment.

But "authentic"assessment does more than simply deny the presence of the spectre. The inauthenticity of the assessment is also a product of its name.It seeks to magic it away using the power of words. Its very name an incantation, a prayer, a spell. By calling itself "authentic”, the term attempts a deliberate act of concealment. The name itself becomes a kind of declarative magic, seeking to make real what is only an illusion. It is a linguistic sleight of hand that tries to erase the very spectre it summoned. By naming the assessment as authentic, we are led to believe that its reality is a given and that it has an outside to which it can be compared. But as our argument has shown, this is a flawed premise. The name is not a description of a quality; it is a declaration of a belief, an attempt to make a phantom cohere through a simple act of language.

The Paradox of Being and Non-Being

As Vallis' paper points out, spectres "problematise being and non-being". This is a perfect description of the apprentice's predicament. They cannot stop being an apprentice, but within the assessment's frame, their identity is temporarily blurred by the ghost of a candidate; the ghost of their own candidature. This is not a malicious haunting, but one that, as Derrida describes, "disturbs notions of time and history". The apprentice's focus shifts from the real-world future of their trade to the immediate, constructed reality of the test.

The assessor's gaze is what summons the spectre. This haunting occurs irrespective of the simulated or situated nature of the assessment. The assessor isn't just observing the apprentice's actions; they are reading them through the lens of a pedagogical text. This gaze transforms the apprentice's professional identity into an academic one, a paradox that exists only within the contrived space of the assessment. Derrida's theory of hauntology lifts the visor of this ghostly presence to reveal that the "authentic"assessment is no more real than the simulated assessment.

The Electrician's Gaze: A Pedagogical Act

While the educational assessor's gaze haunts the apprentice by transforming them into a candidate, the master electrician's gaze works differently. It is not there to judge against a rubric, but to guide, teach, and provide a model. This pedagogical gaze is a gaze of mentorship and acknowledgment.

When I was an apprentice, I remember wanting to see my journeyman smile, acknowledge my work and realize that I respected him and his teaching enough to want to reproduce it. I wanted to see him see that I was learning and doing well. But the smile that I wanted to see wasn't just a mark of approval; it was a confirmation that I was becoming successfully initiated into a community of practice. The apprentice wants to see the journeyman's smile because that acknowledgment is a sign of respect and a confirmation that they are successfully learning to reproduce the master's craft.

This gaze is part of a shared text—the tradition of the trade itself. The apprentice is not performing for a grade; they are participating in a conversation that has been going on for generations. This is the truly authentic, un-haunted form of assessment, where the performance is not being judged against a pre-written text, but is becoming part of a living one. And whilst all assessment is a form of reading, the master electrician's gaze is one of mentorship and tradition, whilst the educational assessor's is one of cold, bureaucratic scrutiny. It would be ridiculous to suggest that the assessor would see the same or more than the electrician can see. The assessor cannot see the nuances, the learning process, or the development that comes from experience. What the assessor sees is the behaviour of the haunted candidate/apprentice with all the construct irrelevant variances that the assessor brings along with the construct.

At work, the apprentice, both as learner and legitimate peripheral participant, is not performing for a grade; they are working to ensure the installation under scrutiny stands up to the objective criteria of professional verification. The criteria are not pedagogical; they are not even the personal preferences of the individual electrician or apprentice on the job: they are rooted in the physics of electricity and the law. This is the ultimate proof of competence. They are the criteria that the apprentice must learn to voluntarily incorporate into their being in order to become competent. What is required to enable this transition is not "authentic"assessment but "authentic"learning. And for that to happen, what is required is more support and funding (read, money) for employers so that they have the time and breathing space to provide meaningful learning opportunities. What is not required is the futile pursuit of the contrived fantasy of "authentic"assessment.

Conclusion

References

Mark Dooley, 'The Surprising Conservatism of Jacques Derrida', The European Conservative, https://europeanconservative.com/articles/essay/the-surprising-conservatism-of-jacques-derrida/, accessed 20th August 2025

Carmen Vallis (2025) "authentic"assessment in higher education: the spectre of lost futures, Teaching in Higher Education, 30:3, 744-751, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2024.2362217

Peter Salmon (2021) An Event, Perhaps: A Biography of Jacques Derrida, London, Verso

Image Credit

The Pedagogical Nudge: When Less Direction Creates More Learning⤴

from Blue Collar

Picture this: An apprentice is tasked with safely isolating a three-phase circuit as part of an assessment. They've done everything correct so far but they've got themselves muddled at “Step 8: Test the Circuit”.

They've done the sequence of tests wrong a couple of times and they are perplexed. Now, they've frozen, they're staring, unseeingly and incomprehensibly into the distribution board. Embarrassed; they start to panic.

And the educator says, “You've done seven tests”.

Nothing more. No admonition. No correction. No direct instruction. You can almost see the gears turning; you can almost hear the machine cranking back into life. Within moments, they're revising their approach, catching their own error, and continuing with renewed understanding.

Despite the somewhat banality of the observer's statement, this moment represents something profound in educational practice - “the pedagogical nudge”. It's the craft of saying just enough to prompt reflection without robbing learners of their agency or the satisfaction of discovery. Far from being a casual teaching trick, or even an unprincipled cheat, the pedagogical nudge represents a sophisticated application of the principles of Assessment as Learning (AaL), one that recognizes learning as an active, constructive process.

The paradox is compelling: sometimes the most powerful teaching happens when we say the least. But understanding why this works requires us to explore some fundamental principles of how learning actually occurs.

The Zone of Proximal Development: Where Learning Lives

Lev Vygotsky's concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) provides the theoretical foundation for understanding why pedagogical nudges can be so effective. The ZPD represents the optimum sweet spot between what a learner can do independently and what they can achieve with appropriate support. It's not just about difficulty level - it's about the quality and nature of the support provided.

A doctrinal approach to error correction often involves direct instruction that sits outside the learner's ZPD. When you immediately tell students what they've done wrong and tell them how to fix it, you’ve essentially done the cognitive work for them. This might lead to immediate compliance, but it doesn't develop the learner's capacity for self-monitoring and self-correction. Ethically, it's the very antithesis of good pedagogical practice because it cares more for the educator's own needs than the learner's.

The ZPD suggests that the most powerful learning happens when support is carefully calibrated - enough to bridge the gap between current ability and potential achievement, but not so much that it removes the learner's active engagement in the process. This is where scaffolding becomes crucial, not as a permanent support structure, but as temporary assistance that can be gradually withdrawn as the learner develops independence.

The pedagogical nudge operates precisely within this zone. It provides just enough information to activate the learner's existing knowledge and trigger reflection, without supplying the complete solution. This approach maintains what Vygotsky called the "distance" between actual and potential development - the space where learning actually occurs.

The Anatomy of a Pedagogical Nudge

Within the Assessment as Learning framework, the pedagogical nudge emerges as a sophisticated strategy that honours both the complexity of learning and the agency of the learner. Unlike simplistic correction methods that provide quick fix solutions, the pedagogical nudge creates what we might call a "productive pause" - a moment of cognitive tension that activates existing knowledge and prompts self-examination.

The most effective pedagogical nudges share several key characteristics. They often take the form of subtle statements of fact, as in our opening example: "You've done seven tests." This isn't an accusation or correction; it's simply a statement of fact, presented neutrally. The power lies not in what is said, but in what is not said - the space left for the learner to make connections and draw conclusions.

Strategic use of educator presence plays an equally important role. Sometimes the mere fact that the usually silent observer speaks at all creates the productive pause. This highlights how the pedagogical nudge operates on multiple levels - verbal, spatial, and temporal. The timing of the intervention, the positioning of the educator, and even the quality of silence that follows all contribute to its effectiveness.

The psychological mechanism underlying successful nudging involves creating just enough cognitive dissonance to prompt reflection without triggering defensive responses. When learners feel criticized or corrected, they often become focused on face-saving rather than learning. They will often seek external scapegoats rather than correct their internal chaos. The pedagogical nudge sidesteps this by maintaining the learner's sense of competence while gently highlighting inconsistencies or gaps in their reasoning.

The Science Behind the Strategy

The concept of "nudging" gained widespread recognition through Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein's influential work on behavioral economics. In their seminal Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness, they demonstrate how subtle changes to choice architecture - the context in which decisions are made - can significantly influence behaviour without restricting freedom of choice. Their classic examples, from cafeteria layouts that promote healthier eating to default organ donation policies, reveal how small environmental modifications can yield profound behavioural changes.

While Thaler and Sunstein focused primarily on policy and consumer behavior, their insights translate remarkably well to educational contexts. The pedagogical nudge operates on similar principles: it subtly alters the "choice architecture" of the learning moment without removing the learner's agency or autonomy. Just as placing fruit at eye level nudges cafeteria users toward healthier choices while still allowing them to select pizza, the pedagogical nudge presents teaching at its most subtle, guiding the learner towards reflection while preserving their ownership of the discovery process.

The effectiveness of pedagogical nudging draws from several converging areas of research, not just behavioural economics. From a cognitive science perspective, self-discovery activates different neural pathways than those activated by the reception of information. When learners identify their own errors through reflection, they engage in what researchers call "generative learning" - actively constructing understanding rather than simply storing transmitted information. This process strengthens both the specific learning and the metacognitive skills needed for future independent learning.

Recent research on pedagogical nudging in entrepreneurship education demonstrates how this approach can transform student dispositions and their perceived fit with challenging subjects. The key insight is that nudging doesn't just correct immediate errors; it shapes learners' relationships with difficulty and uncertainty, building resilience and self-efficacy.

The motivational impact cannot be understated. When learners experience the satisfaction of self-correction, they develop what psychologists call "intrinsic motivation" - the drive to engage in learning for its own sake rather than for external rewards or to avoid chastisement. This shift from external to internal locus of control is fundamental to developing lifelong learners, or in our case, good electricians with a drive towards a continuous development of their craft.

Practical Implementation: The Art of Stepping Back

Implementing pedagogical nudges effectively requires developing what might be called "pedagogical sensitivity" - the ability to read the learning moment and respond with precisely calibrated support. This involves several key considerations.

First is recognizing when to nudge versus when to be more explicit, and when to remain silent. Pedagogical nudges work best when learners have the foundational knowledge needed for self-correction but have simply lost sight of it or made a logical error. If the gap in understanding is too large, a nudge may create frustration rather than insight. The educator must continuously assess whether the learner is working within their ZPD.

Crafting effective nudge statements requires deep subject matter knowledge combined with understanding of how learners typically think about the content. The most powerful nudges often restate something the learner already knows but has temporarily forgotten or overlooked. They might highlight a contradiction, reference a key principle, or simply be a simple statement of empirical fact.

The physical and temporal positioning of nudges matters enormously. Interrupting too early prevents learners from fully developing their thinking, while waiting too long may allow confusion to compound. Many effective nudges occur just after learners have committed to a position but before they've invested too heavily in defending it.

Common pitfalls include nudging too frequently (which can create dependence). A beginner's error is being too subtle for the learner's current state, or in contrast, the obverse, letting personal investment in being "helpful" override pedagogical judgment. The most challenging aspect for many educators is learning to tolerate productive struggle - resisting the urge to rescue learners from difficulty that is actually serving their development.

The Nudge Effect: Building Confidence Through Self-Discovery

One of the most profound but often overlooked benefits of pedagogical nudging lies in its impact on learner self-efficacy - what Albert Bandura defined as an individual's belief in their capability to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments. The moment when a learner recognizes their own solution following a well-timed nudge creates what Bandura identified as the most powerful source of self-efficacy: mastery experiences.

Bandura's research revealed that self-efficacy beliefs are formed through four primary sources, with mastery experiences being the most influential. When learners successfully perform a task, especially one they initially found challenging, they develop stronger beliefs about their capabilities. The pedagogical nudge is particularly powerful in this regard because it preserves the learner's ownership of the solution. Unlike direct correction, which might be attributed to external help, the self-discovery prompted by a nudge allows learners to rightfully claim credit for their success.

This attribution pattern is crucial for developing what researchers call "academic self-efficacy" - confidence in one's ability to succeed in educational tasks. When a learner thinks, "I figured that out myself," they're not just solving an immediate problem; they're building a reservoir of confidence that they carry forward to future challenges. This confidence manifests as increased willingness to tackle difficult problems, greater persistence in the face of obstacles, and reduced anxiety around assessment situations.

The psychological mechanism underlying this confidence boost relates to what Bandura called "outcome expectancies" - beliefs about whether certain actions will lead to desired outcomes. Each successful self-correction strengthens the learner's expectation that careful reflection and analysis will yield solutions. This creates a positive feedback loop where increased confidence leads to greater engagement with challenging material, which provides more opportunities for successful problem-solving. This is an academic variation of the Matthew effect wherein success breeds success.

Perhaps most importantly though, the pedagogical nudge builds confidence not just in subject-specific knowledge but in the learner's capacity for independent thinking and self-regulation. When students repeatedly experience the satisfaction of self-discovery, they develop what might be called "metacognitive self-efficacy" - confidence in their ability to monitor, evaluate, and direct their own learning processes. This meta-level confidence proves invaluable as learners encounter new domains and unfamiliar challenges throughout their educational journey.

Assessment Transformation: When Boundaries Blur

One of the most sophisticated aspects of pedagogical nudging lies in its ability to transform the very nature of assessment interactions in real-time. While educational theory often presents Assessment as Learning, Assessment for Learning, and Assessment of Learning as distinct categories, the pedagogical nudge reveals how these boundaries blur in practice.

Consider again a practical assessment of an apprentice's ability to safely isolate a circuit—a typically pure Assessment of Learning context designed to measure existing competence. The moment an educator deploys a pedagogical nudge, they temporarily shift the interaction into Assessment as Learning territory. The learner is no longer merely demonstrating knowledge for evaluation; they're actively constructing new understanding through the reflective process the nudge initiates.

This assessment transformation serves a dual purpose with remarkable efficiency. From an AaL perspective, the nudge can reveal a learner's true capability by removing temporary blocks, test anxiety, or momentary oversights that might otherwise obscure their actual understanding. We're assessing their best thinking rather than their performance under the necessary artificial constraints of the simulation thus leading to more valid and authentic evaluation. The pedagogical nudge, paradoxically, doesn't undermine the AoL; instead, it undoes the construct-irrelevant variance of nervousness that threatened the AoL's very validity. Reframing the assessment, for that brief moment, from AoL to AaL, creates the platform for the AoL to measure what it's actually designed to measure. (I will return to this idea of reframing at a later date with a consideration of how the work of Mikael Klintman fits in here).

Simultaneously, the same interaction provides genuine learning opportunities, building both knowledge and the confidence that comes from self-discovery - classic Assessment as Learning outcomes. The pedagogical nudge thus acts as what we might call an "assessment transformer," capable of enhancing the validity and educational value of any assessment interaction, irrespective of the assessment's original purpose.

This reveals pedagogical nudging as a meta-strategy that transcends traditional assessment categories. Whether deployed in formative classroom discussions or high-stakes summative assessments, the pedagogical nudge serves the dual function of more accurately revealing learner competence while simultaneously developing that competence. In essence, it represents assessment practice at its most sophisticated - flexible, responsive, and educationally purposeful.

Conclusion: The Courage to Step Back

The pedagogical nudge represents a fundamental shift in how we conceptualize the educator's role - from information provider to facilitator of thinking, from problem solver to problem framer. This requires considerable professional courage, as it means stepping back from the immediate personal satisfaction of providing answers in favour of the longer-term benefit of developing independent learners.

The craft lies in knowing when to speak and when to remain silent, when to guide and when to let learners find their own way. It demands that we trust both the learning process and our learners' capacity for growth. In our achievement-oriented educational culture, this kind of pedagogical restraint can feel counter-intuitive, even risky.

Yet my own experience is clear: when we create space for learners to discover, reflect, and self-correct, we're not just teaching content - we're developing the metacognitive capabilities that enable lifelong learning. The pedagogical nudge, applied skillfully within the learner's zone of proximal development, becomes a powerful tool for fostering both immediate understanding and long-term learning independence.

The next time you find yourself ready to provide a direct correction, pause and consider: what single fact or gentle observation might prompt your learner to discover the answer for themselves? In that moment of pedagogical restraint, you may find one of the most powerful teaching tools at your disposal.

-------------

If you're interested in this subject but aren't sure where to start, I'd recommend beginning with Thaler and Sunstein's book and/or the Kahneman if for no other reason than the fact that they'll probably be in your local library or High St. bookshop. That's where I started.

Follow-up Sources

Nudge Theory Origins

Behavioral Economics

- Thaler, R.H., & Sunstein, C.R. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Yale University Press.

- Original nudge theory framework

- Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

- Cognitive biases and decision-making processes

Nudging in Education - Specific Resources

Recent Academic Research (2024)

- Chen, L., et al. (2024). The effectiveness of nudging key learning resources to support online engagement in higher education courses. Distance Education, 45(1), 89-109.

- Demonstrates how nudging can improve student engagement using learning analytics

- Lachenmayr, S., & Lachner, A. (2024). How do teachers in vocational and higher education nudge their students? A qualitative study. International Journal for Research in Vocational Education and Training, 11(1), 46-67.

- Explores how teachers naturally use nudging techniques in practice

Foundational Nudging in Education Research

- Van Gorp, K., Segers, M., & Poglia, E. (2020). Nudging in education: from theory towards guidelines for successful implementation. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 36(3), 713-736.

- Comprehensive framework for implementing nudging in educational contexts

- Damgaard, M.T., & Nielsen, H.S. (2018). Nudging in education. Economics of Education Review, 64, 313-342.

- Systematic review showing nudging effectiveness in education, particularly for students facing behavioral barriers

Practical Applications & Case Studies

- Pugatch, T., & Schroeder, E. (2024). Study More Tomorrow: Nudging Student Study Habits. Oregon State University Economics Working Paper.

- Recent research on using financial incentives and nudges to influence student study behavior

Educational Technology & Digital Nudging

- EdTechHub (2024).** What is 'Nudging' in Education and How Does it Contribute to Behaviour Change? Learning Brief Series.

- Accessible overview of nudging applications in educational technology contexts

- Available at: https://edtechhub.org/evidence/learning-brief-series/nudging-for-behaviour-change-in-education/

- The Decision Lab. Edunudging: the future of learning?

- Blog exploring digital nudging applications in education

- Available at: https://thedecisionlab.com/insights/education/edunudging-the-future-of-learning

Practitioner Resources

- TES Magazine (2023).** Nudge theory: how it can boost attainment.

- Practical guide for teachers on implementing nudging strategies

- Available at: https://www.tes.com/magazine/teaching-learning/secondary/how-nudge-theory-can-boost-attainment

Assessment as Learning - Core Resources - Zone of Proximal Development & Scaffolding

- Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.

- Essential primary source for ZPD concepts

- Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.

- Foundational work on scaffolding concepts

- Wass, R., & Golding, C. (2014). Sharpening a tool for teaching: the zone of proximal development. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(6), 671-684.

- Modern application of ZPD to higher education contexts

Assessment as Learning Foundations

- Earl, L.M. (2013). Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.

- Comprehensive guide to AaL principles and practices

- NSW Education Standards Authority. Assessment for, as and of Learning.

- Clear governmental framework explaining the three assessment approaches

- Available at: https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/k-10/understanding-the-curriculum/assessment/approaches

- Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31.

- Seminal work on formative assessment theory that underpins AaL

Video Resources

- Dylan Wiliam - Assessment for Learning (Various YouTube presentations)

- Search "Dylan Wiliam formative assessment" for comprehensive video explanations

- Rick Stiggins - Assessment AS Learning

- Multiple conference presentations available on YouTube explaining AaL principles

- John Hattie - Visible Learning and Assessment

- TED talks and conference presentations on effective assessment practices

Blogs & Online Communities

- Assessment for Learning Blog (searchable online)

- Practitioner-focused content on formative assessment strategies

- Edutopia Assessment Resources

- Regular articles on innovative assessment practices including AaL approaches

- ASCD Assessment Resources

- Professional development materials and articles on assessment theory and practice

Core Theoretical Foundations

- Earl, L.M. (2013). Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.

- Comprehensive guide to AaL principles and practices

Recent Research on Pedagogical Nudging

Direct Applications

- Lackéus, M., Lundqvist, M., & Williams Middleton, K. (2020). Transformative learning in the entrepreneurship education process: the role of pedagogical nudging and reflection. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 26(7), 1489-1515.

- Introduces "pedagogical nudging" as a method, which can transform student dispositions and their perceived "fit" with the field of entrepreneurship

- Van Gorp, K., Segers, M., & Poglia, E. (2020). Nudging in education: from theory towards guidelines for successful implementation. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 36(3), 713-736.

- Behavioral economics strategy that aims to influence behavior by changing the environment, valuable for educational contexts.

Cognitive Science & Psychology Foundations

Metacognition & Self-Regulated Learning

- Zimmerman, B.J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.

- Key concepts for understanding learning independence

- Flavell, J.H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.

- Foundational work on metacognitive awareness

Motivation & Learning

- Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.

- Self-determination theory relevant to learner agency

Practical Implementation Resources

Teaching Strategies

- Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2010). Guided Instruction: How to Develop Confident and Successful Learners. ASCD.

- Practical approaches to scaffolding and guided learning

- Johnston, P.H. (2004). Choice Words: How Our Language Affects Children's Learning. Stenhouse Publishers.

- The impact of educator language choices on learning

Classroom Applications

- Heritage, M. (2018). Formative Assessment in Practice: A Process of Inquiry and Action. Harvard Education Press.

- Practical formative assessment strategies

- Nottingham, J. (2017). The Learning Challenge: How to Guide Your Students Through the Learning Pit to Achieve Deeper Learning. Corwin Press.

- Managing productive struggle in learning

Professional Development Resources

Research-Practice Connections

- Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

- Comprehensive analysis of feedback effectiveness

- Sadler, D.R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144.

- Classic work on formative assessment design

Current Trends

- Pellegrino, J.W. (2020). Sciences of learning and development in education. Applied Developmental Science, 24(1), 1-18.

- Modern synthesis of learning sciences research

Online Resources & Communities

- Assessment Reform Group: Research and resources on formative assessment

- Learning Sciences Research Institute: Current research on learning and instruction

- *mVisible Learning**: John Hattie's meta-analysis database and resources

- EdTechHub: Technology-enhanced nudging strategies in education

Recommended Journals for Ongoing Research

- Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice

- Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability

- Teaching and Teacher Education

- Learning and Instruction

- Educational Psychology Review

- International Journal of Educational Research

Key Search Terms for Further Exploration

- Pedagogical nudging

- Assessment as learning

- Zone of proximal development classroom practice

- Scaffolding withdrawal strategies

- "Metacognitive prompting

- Self-regulated learning interventions

- Formative assessment dialogue

- "Productive failure pedagogy”

My short and long “must reads” around ChatGPT and LLM⤴

from howsheilaseesIT

Undoubtedly LLM (large language models), and in particular ChatGPT, is the hot topic in education right now. David Hopkins has helpfully started and shared a flipgrid where he is sharing articles around generative AI, and I know many others are doing the same. Amongst the hype there are thankfully a growing body of people who are writing informed critiques. In this post I just want to quickly highlight a couple of publications that I think are a must read.

Firstly the UNESCO Quick Start Guide to ChatGPT and Artificial Intelligence. This is provides a really good overview of issues including a useful flow chart to help decisions around using ChatGPT, applications for education and some of the current issues. I suspect this will become a “go to” resource. It’s something that all educators should read.

And once they’ve done that then I have to recommend 2 longer pieces by Helen Beetham. Firstly, “on language, language models and writing“. In this essay, Helen really gets to grips with a key issue that is missing in many of the articles about LLM and ChatGPT, that is what is the purpose of writing? Why do we do it? It’s not just about structuring of text, personal reading. I think most people (well at least you, dear reader) does now understand that these language models work on prediction, and have no sense of context. So although the text may read well, it will often lack purpose and understanding. As Helen points out ” Writing by human writers is not only about the world, it is of the world and accountable in it.”

She goes on to explore some of the potential benefits of using systems such as ChatGPT. Can they be seen as writing partners? We supply the prompts, they supply the text . . ? I was struck by this.

“The illusion that these are more than tools or interfaces – that they are our partners in language, our interlocutors. We already spend large parts of our lives engaged in vivid graphical and sensory illusions. We should count the costs and benefits before rushing into a life of dialogue with illusory others”

And this

“Students see writing as a diverse, messy, inexact, variously motivated practice they are developing for themselves. Then perhaps they can aspire to be a writer among writers, and not a human version of ChatGPT.

I thank Helen for being the writer she is to have come up with that last turn of phrase. And then she goes on to point out:

But tools are not neutral. Just as language is not ‘simply’ the words we use to express our meanings to other people, tools are not ‘simply’ the means we use for exercising our personal intentions in the world. Tools carry the history of how they were designed and made. They shape practices and contexts and possible futures. . . With so many other tools we can use creatively, we must surely weigh the risks against the creative possibilities.”

In terms of education Helen also raises some really valid points for strategic leadership in universities. It does seem an awful lot of responsibility is being heaped on students, maybe we need to be asking these questions

“While students are held stringently to account for their use of LLMs, how will universities account to students for their own use of these systems? Can they hold out against black-box capabilities being embedded into the platforms they have come to depend on? Who is assessing the risks, and how are those risk assessments and mitigations being shared with the people most affected? These are questions that universities should be attending to with at least as much energy as they are policing students’ use of apps.”

There is also an accompanying piece students assignments in a time of language modelling. Again this is a really thoughtful (and pragmatic) piece about why, how and when to use writing tasks in assessments.

I would thoroughly recommend reading both essays, and engaging with Helen’s writing over on substack.

Learning Despite Assessment⤴

from NomadWarMachine

“Gold star” flickr photo by NomadWarMachine shared under a Creative Commons (BY-NC-SA) license

Recently I’ve heard two different people say the following about assessment:

Assessment is the driver for all learning (in HE)
Active learning and assessment are the same thing

I think that both of these statements are obviously wrong, or they ought to be.

I can, sadly, understand how assessment becomes the motivating factor for many students because the stresses of being a student and the pressure to always get the best grade override any joy that there might be in learning for the sake of learning, so I can appreciate (1) being said, at least as an observation about the current state of affairs in HE.

The last semester that I taught undergraduate philosophy was particularly fraught, with many tutorials being cancelled due to union strikes and others snowed off, but one event stands out, even now. A particularly bright student went off at a tangent, and I suggested some reading that might interest him, probably some Wittgenstein. After the tutorial, a group complained to the course convenor that I was wasting their time by talking about materials that would not be needed for the final exam. This wasn’t the only reason that I handed in my notice and walked away from that post, but it was a contributing factor.

However, (2) just strikes me as bizarre. Putting to one side my issues with the term ‘active learning’ (I don’t believe that learning can be passive – for learning to be happening, there must be something active ‘in the learner’s head’), then I think that we could reasonably assert that a student who is working on an assessment is actively learning, but that does not entail that all (active) learning is or involves assessment. When I reflect on the times that I have learnt the most, they have usually had nothing to do with assessment. The serious fun that happens during experiences such as #CLMooc, #DS106 and the rhizos have led to some of the most meaningful learning that I’ve ever experienced – and assessment most definitely had no part in those experiences.

The bright student in my story above might have ended up using the ‘extra’ learning he had done as part of a future assessment, or he might not – learning is not contingent on past or future assessment. All of this shows that active learning and assessment are not the same thing, and that there can be learning without assessment. And I think I am going to go further and assert that there can also be a type of learning that happens despite assessment. If students are over assessed, as they sometimes can be, then any extra curricula activity – and the meaningful learning that happens as a result of serendipity – will have to be fitted in somehow. And if there is pressure, from whichever direction, to teach to the test, then the keen student who strays beyond the required materials will be learning despite assessment.

Assessment has its place, and accreditation is important. But assessment is not the whole picture, and we should firmly resist anyone who suggests that it is.

Pedagogy, place and pragmatics⤴

from howsheilaseesIT

Following on from the report that has just been published on Approaches to Curriculum and Learning Design in the UK HE sector, Helen Beetham and I are exploring some of the key issues that were highlighted through the survey and the interviews we conducted. Central to this are issues around time, space and place. Earlier this week we were able to start to share some of our initial thinking during a workshop at the Jisc Student Experience Experts Meeting.

In the interviews I conducted as part of the project, there was a general consensus that after the first lockdown most organisations were quite keen, even quite ambitious about their future plans for new approaches to learning and teaching. There was a sense of an appetite to embrace some the changes to practice that being forced off campus had brought about. Assessment was a huge part of that.

Rapid changes to assessments had to be introduced, along with rapid changes to assessment regulations. Student care was high on the agenda – a visible sign of that was the no detriment practices that many adopted. Again in the interviews, it was clear that lots of the changes from f2f exams to online submissions of various types including open book, authentic assessments have now been adopted.

In terms of wider curriculum change, it was also clear from the survey responses and interviews that the appetite for changes to other aspects of curriculum design and delivery had been divisively impacted by the UK Governments’ insistence that everyone needed to be back on campus, at lectures and doing “proper” in person exams. Never mind the lessons that had been learnt from students about the benefits of more flexible, accessible and inclusive approaches. Strategic statements were subtly altered to reflect as a pragmatic response to that political driver.

However, back in the real world, we can’t ignore that our understandings and use of the spaces, places (both physical and digital) and times for learning and teaching have been altered by the pandemic experience. Students have been off campus, on campus, off campus, on and off campus for a bit . . . and now on campus. Typical 1st and 2nd year students have had their final years of school turned upside down in the same way.

I think how “be” a student has changed, and that might be one of the reasons there have been so many issues around engagement. Where (and when) you actually need to be isn’t as clear cut as it was in the “before times”.

Going back to assessment, some of the comments student interns on the Irish EDTL project made during one of their webinars really struck me. Including the student who very eloquently shared how being able to take assessments off campus, in a space that was comfortable for them, massively reduced their stress levels; another who felt that the design of some of the online MCQs exams they had taken were “mean” as they didn’t allow you to go back to a question to answer it. That experience was making them want almost long for pen and paper exams. In the panel discussion at the experts meeting, Deborah Longworth from the University of Birmingham shared how some changes to assessment are now having impact on the mental health of students. She described how some students can think that a 72 hour open book exam means that they need to be working on it for 72 hours. Does this mean taking time to develop more scaffolding around time expectations, or is it an “in” to go back to fixed, in person exam that everyone understands the conventions of ?

Whilst terms such hybrid and hyflex are commonly used and, are they really fully understood by both students and staff? Do we really have effective examples of how these approaches work in practice. This is one area Helen and I want to explore from a pedagogical lens.

We are starting with time, and thinking in terms of synchronous and asynchronous. Then considering what types of activities/interactions that work best in these contexts, and then starting to map the spaces and places that students and staff need to be in as these activities are instantiated. In terms of broadening our approaches to learning design, do we need to be more explicit about time, space and place expectations in?

As the cost of living crisis starts to really kick in, what additional changes do we need/ are we making to make to our physical estate to support our students (and staff). Warm areas, areas with kettles? What choices might commuting students have to make about how many times a week they can be on campus?

As we discussed these issues in the meeting, a dose of pragmatism was injected into the conversation. Whilst it is often said that pedagogy should always come before technology, in reality it’s pragmatism, and the contextual constraints that everyone has to work with that really make have “the power”. Pragmatics always win over everything else.

I know I have run many learning design workshops where some really innovative approaches have been planned, only to find out that 2 weeks before the start of term, the plans have been changed because of timetabling issues or more commonly not enough staff resource or time.

As the sector moves forward is it just easier to cope with increases in student numbers, and the staff/studio ratio to just timetable in lectures? Is it just pragmatically more effective not to change workload models and notions of contact time to reflect the shifts in preparation/contact time and presence needed, and stick with the conventions we are all familiar and comfortable with?

Hopefully not, and that’s what we are working on now, to develop resources that can help provide guidance and exemplars of how the sector can, and is, evolving to allow us to think about pedagogy and place and hopefully start to change some of the pragmatics and constraints approaches to learning design, and in turn the student experience, exist in. I know Peter Bryant’s recent post on the “snapback” discusses many of these issues in more depth so is worth a look if you haven’t seen it yet.

So if you have any thoughts on this, or would like to share any examples, please do get in touch, or leave a comment. We want to provide spaces to have these conversations and hopefully provide some resource to help others have them in their contexts.

PowerPoint Presenter Coach to help become clear, confident and expressive when communicating & presenting⤴

from Malcolm Wilson

If you are looking for a way to support learners (or indeed, yourself!) to be clear, expressive and confident when communicating & presenting to others using digital tools, then Microsoft PowerPoint Presenter Coach is a handy feature of Microsoft PowerPoint. It’s built in to PowerPoint whether on the web, on desktop/laptop or mobile device, and …

Inspiring Digital Enterprise Award – iDEA⤴

from Malcolm Wilson

The Inspiring Digital Enterprise Award, known as iDEA, is an award programme which provides access to a range of free on-demand online courses. In completing courses from the wide range available they not only aim to support developing digital, enterprise and employability skills, the completion of the assessments built into each course provide the means …

Unwrapping the Fun in Assessment & Feedback⤴

from NomadWarMachine

A podcast recorded on December 2020 when I talk a lot about assessment, feedback and participatory learning

Beyond Multiple Choice #BMC2020⤴

from Joe Wilson @ ...........Experimental Blog

I am doing a bit of tidying up and catching up on some posts that should have appeared earlier in the year. What a strange yet busy time it has been. In early November I was asked to contribute to this global conference on assessment. You can find my modest contribution from a College perspective in day three of the proceedings.

Beyond Multiple Choice #BMC2020 ( worth clicking on timestamp below videos to see running schedule)

It was a really interesting conference given the world's reaction to CoVid - suddenly on-line testing came into its own - in ways that may surprise you - if you watch one session have a look at final session of the day about how the national testing system in Scotland is operating and the political pressures around this. It's all about putting the learner at the centre.

My slides below - if you have an interest in following this global community you can join the linkedIn Group.

ScotEduBlogs

An aggregation of Scottish educational blogs