Influential Factors in the Design and Implementation of Electronic Assessment at a Research-Led University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Influential factors in the design and implementation of electronic assessment at a research-led university Peter O. Alston, BSc (Hons), MSc (Distinction), PG Cert. September 2017 This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Department of Educational Research, Lancaster University, UK. This thesis results entirely from my own work and has not been offered previously for any other degree or diploma. Signature ........................................................ Influential factors in the design and implementation of electronic assessment at a research-led university Doctor of Philosophy, September 2017 Abstract Of the many challenges faced by those in higher education (HE), the use of technology to support teaching, learning and assessment activities have been particularly prominent in recent years. Adopting a critical realist perspective, and drawing upon institutional ethnography and social practice theory, this thesis set out to examine how academic and professional services staff at a pre- 1992, research-led university engaged with electronic assessment (e- assessment), and the extent to which the structures and formal policies impacted on design and implementation. Data were collected through a review of institutional documentation and face-to-face interviews with 23 participants, which were then analysed using the Framework method. The findings suggest that institutional priorities not only have a direct impact on the culture of the institution, but also the visibility and importance of e- assessment. In turn, those engaged in the practice of e-assessment are actively engaged in workarounds, as they negotiate institutional structures and formal policies. Whilst external factors have contributed to the visibility and desire for adopting e-assessment, successful engagement by academics is largely dependent on the reliability of the institution’s technological infrastructure and leadership at the local level, to support the operational aspects of delivery and more crucially, the enactment of institutional policies in disciplinary contexts. The findings also indicate that whilst institutional communities of practice are a valuable resource for sharing best practice, there is still a disconnect between academics and professional services staff with regards to what e-assessment entails, as to whether it is a process, a method, or a tool. Future efforts should focus on developing a shared vocabulary and recognition that e-assessment practice exhibits characteristics of the “third space” between academics and i professional services staff, encouraging a reflection of the key roles that each play in the design and implementation of e-assessment. ii Contents Abstract................................................................................................................................... i Contents ................................................................................................................................ iii Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... vii Publications derived from work on the Doctoral Programme ......................... ix List of abbreviations ........................................................................................................ xi List of Figures and Tables ............................................................................................ xiii Chapter 1 - Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Context ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Motivations for the study ......................................................................................................... 2 1.3. Literature Gap ............................................................................................................................... 3 1.4. Overview of the investigation ................................................................................................. 4 1.4.1. Research Questions .......................................................................................................... 5 1.4.2. Theoretical Framework .................................................................................................. 6 1.4.3. Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 7 1.4.4. Truth claims ......................................................................................................................... 9 1.4.5. Contribution to knowledge ........................................................................................ 10 1.5. Time Frame ................................................................................................................................. 10 1.6. Structure of thesis .................................................................................................................... 11 1.7. Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 2 - Research Setting ....................................................................................... 12 2.1. OldU: A brief history ................................................................................................................ 12 2.1.1. OldU Structure ................................................................................................................. 14 2.2. Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) at OldU ............................................................ 15 2.2.1. The ExtOnline partnership ......................................................................................... 15 2.2.2. On-campus online provision ...................................................................................... 16 2.2.3. Support for e-assessment ........................................................................................... 18 2.3. Policies & Strategies at OldU ................................................................................................ 19 2.3.1. Support for TEL ............................................................................................................... 20 2.3.2. Support for e-assessment ........................................................................................... 21 2.4. Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 21 Chapter 3 - Literature Review ..................................................................................... 23 3.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 23 3.2. The language of e-assessment ............................................................................................. 25 iii 3.2.1. The ‘academy’ perspective ......................................................................................... 27 3.3. The promise of e-assessment .............................................................................................. 29 3.3.1. ‘Familiar’ concerns ......................................................................................................... 31 3.4. The challenge of e-assessment ............................................................................................ 32 3.5. Examining the ‘practice’ of e-assessment ....................................................................... 38 3.5.1. A ‘social practice’ approach ........................................................................................ 39 3.5.2. Relevance to this study ................................................................................................ 41 3.6. Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 42 Chapter 4 - Research Design ........................................................................................ 45 4.1. Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 45 4.2. The Researcher .......................................................................................................................... 46 4.2.1. Research Position ........................................................................................................... 46 4.2.2. ‘Insider’ Research ........................................................................................................... 48 4.2.3. Reflexivity .......................................................................................................................... 49 4.3. Research Paradigm .................................................................................................................. 50 4.3.1. Critiques of IE .................................................................................................................. 54 4.3.2. Extending the paradigm .............................................................................................. 55 4.4. Research Sample ......................................................................................................................