SUMMARY OF RESPONSES FROM INTERVIEWS

With these exhibits from the interviews with both the focus groups for students and the lecturers it is prudent to give a summary of all the key points being raised. These are captured in Table 5.2 followed by a discussion of each point. The summary intends to show the similarities and differences in the responses from the two groups of participants.

127

Table 5.2-Summary Of Responses For Students’ Focus Group and Lecturers’ Interviews Focus Groups’

Interview

Lecturers’ Interview Similarities Differences

1. Role of Assessment -To apprise students on performance

-Bulletin and Course Outline main

documents to guide assessment

-Students note the importance of Course Objectives and Course Content Role of Assessment -Formative assessment is very effective because it promotes good performance -Course objectives guide assessment -No document to guide assessment -Assessment places strong emphasis on performance -Course objectives and course content important Bulletin and Course Outline Vs No document to guide assessment 2. Range of Assessment Methods -Formative assessment is in the form of quizzes and assignments -Students prefer assignments because they can research and help each other

Range of Assessment Methods -Quizzes and assignments -Assignments give opportunity for research and application of knowledge -Formative assessment is in the form of quizzes and assignments

-Assignments preferred method -More quizzes than assignments

-Assignments give chance to help each other -Assignments for research and knowledge expansion

3. Frequency and Timing -More quizzes than assignments

-Feedback on Quizzes within a week for smaller classes -Students prefer more assignments than quizzes

Frequency and Timing

-More quizzes than assignments (anchor performance) -Feedback within a week for smaller classes

-Assignments preferred

-More quizzes than assignments (anchor performance) -More Assignments preferred -Formative assessment more effective in smaller classes -Assignments give chance to help each other -Assignments for research and knowledge expansion

Source: Focus Group Interview Guide for Students and Lecturers’ Interview Guide

Table 5.2 shows certain indications regarding how formative assessment is characterised. There was a strong emphasis on student performance by both groups of participants. This came as a result of the dominance of accountability in the assessment process at Solusi University, (Black, 2013: 209). The lecturers are accountable to the system to award marks or grades and submit a record of such for continuous assessment. The students are equally

128

accountable to get good scores in order to survive the chop. As a result, everyone does anything possible within the system to have the marks or grades to be available. The lecturers then resort to quizzes and short exercises. The students on the other hand succumb to cramming and even cheating in some instances. This however is not in line with the ideals of Self-Regulated learning especially in terms of the use of feedback (see Chapter Two, Section 2.8).

In the sub-section on the role of assessment, both the students and the lecturers were in agreement on two points. They agreed that formative assessment placed a strong emphasis on performance. They also concurred that course objectives and course content were important to formative assessment in assisting the students to read for quizzes. They however differed on the documents that guide assessment. The focus groups were uncertain about which document was being used. Some of them settled on the Bulletin while others resolved that the Course Outline was the nearest document that guided the process of assessment. On the contrary the lecturers reported that there was no document to guide the process of assessment. This in effect shows that there is no document to guide assessment at Solusi University.

In the sub-section on the range of assessment methods both sets of participants recognised the prevalence of quizzes and assignments as the assessment methods. Whilst both groups preferred assignments over other methods of assessment, they differed in the reasons for their preferences. The students perceived that assignments gave them chance to help each other. The lecturers considered assignments to be an opportunity for the students to research and expand their knowledge.

As for the third sub-section on the frequency and timing of the various methods of assessment, indications were that more quizzes than assignments such as research papers and presentations were being given. The main reason was that quizzes provided a better way to boost the performance of students. Formative assessment was considered to be more effective in smaller classes. As a way to improve the formative assessment system it was suggested that more assignments than quizzes should be given. The reasons for this were as different as was indicated in sub-section 2 on the range of assessment methods.

The findings from this study have brought out four conspicuous features on how formative assessment was characterised at Solusi University. Firstly, it was portrayed that the formative

129

assessment process placed a strong emphasis on students’ academic performance. This came out in the responses in each one of the sub-sections of the Focus Groups’ Interview Guide as well as the Lecturers’ Interview Guide. There was an unconcealed engrossment with marks and grades while Self-Regulated learning strategies were being underplayed.

Secondly, course objectives were considered to be very important. These were identified by both the students and the lecturers from the Course Outline. The issues raised revolved around the link that course objectives have to the success of students in the quizzes, tests and assignments. There was however a limited understanding by both groups on the essence of course objectives vis-à-vis Self-Regulated learning; that is knowing that objectives can be used by both lecturers and students to evoke deep learning approaches as perceived in the Theoretical Framework (see Chapter Three, Section 3.6).

Thirdly, there was a paradox on which document was being used to guide assessment practice at Solusi University. The responses from the focus groups let out some uncertainty over which document was being used. The academic Bulletin and the Course Outline were said to be the nearest documents that could be used to guide assessment. The lecturers reported that there was no document that was being used to guide assessment practice in the university.

Lastly, both the lecturers and students preferred assignments over other methods of assessment but for somewhat different reasons between. The students found assignments to be a good source of marks and grades because they could collaborate and discuss the answers. The lecturers on the other hand considered assignments to be a good way of allowing students to become innovative in research and knowledge production.

It is crucial for both the students and the lecturers to have the correct view of formative assessment. “Formative assessment can be seen as the construction of shared and negotiated meanings between teacher and student,” (Yin and Buck, 2014). While this is true such should be directed at self-regulated learning strategies on collaborative learning and deep learning (see Chapter Two, Sections 2.6 and Chapter Three, Section 3.6).

130