The Danger of Going All Out - Alternative Final Assessment in Higher Education

Alternative final assessment sounds progressive. But making it compulsory for every course across every programme can create serious academic problems.

The blunt truth is this:

Not every course should replace its final examination with an alternative assessment.

Some learning outcomes are best assessed through projects, portfolios, presentations or demonstrations. Other learning outcomes may still require students to demonstrate individual mastery in a controlled and time-limited setting.

This may be especially important in courses involving:

• Mathematics and quantitative problem-solving
• Accounting and financial calculations
• Statistics
• Law and legal reasoning
• Scientific principles
• Technical knowledge
• Professional or regulatory requirements

A project can assess application. A presentation can assess communication. A portfolio can show development over time.

But these methods may not always prove that a student can independently recall, understand and apply essential knowledge without outside assistance.

The bigger danger is when faculty members do not understand the difference between a final examination and an alternative final assessment.

A lecturer may take the existing final examination paper, upload it into the LMS, give students one or two days to complete it at home, and rename it “Final Assessment”.

That is not assessment transformation.

It is simply a take-home examination with weaker controls.

The institution may lose the security of a supervised examination without gaining the benefits of authentic assessment. Students can discuss answers, share files, use generative AI, engage third-party assistance or submit work that does not represent their own ability.

The result is the worst of both worlds:

• It is not a secure final examination.
• It is not an authentic alternative assessment.
• It may not provide reliable evidence of individual learning.
• It increases academic integrity risks.
• It can contribute to grade inflation.
• It may weaken confidence in the academic award.

Another risk is forcing lecturers to redesign assessments before lecturers have sufficient assessment literacy.

When alternatives are imposed without proper understanding, lecturers may simply replace a three-hour examination with another written assignment. Students then complete several similar reports in different courses, while lecturers face a much heavier marking workload.

Changing the name does not change the quality.

A weak assessment remains a weak assessment, regardless of whether we call it an examination, assignment or final assessment.

The issue is not whether examinations are traditional or alternative assessments are modern. The real issue is whether the selected method is valid, reliable, fair and suitable for the intended learning outcomes.

In the final article, I will share a more responsible way to make the transition.

#HigherEducation #AssessmentDesign #AcademicIntegrity #QualityAssurance #GenerativeAI

Go to the previous article: The Excitement of Alternative Final Assessment - Higher Education Perspectives

Checking for Errors - Why Bother?

Is checking for errors important? Why bother for the process and normally, takes longer time to execute a task? There must be a reason and this is why.

At a glance, this promotional panel at GSC Pavilion KL for the upcoming Life (2017) movie looks great with good printing resolution.

However, when I take a closer look, I got confused with who is Ryan Reynolds and Rebecca Ferguson. They designer got mixed up with the two main stars in the movie.

Errors like this do happen and it is very common but the implication of some errors can be fatal!

Is this the designer fault to allow such error to occurs? Maybe but they cannot be blamed for everything. Sometime it could be due to the constraint of time to push things out for production and there is no checking in the entire process - from the person who provides the information, the designer who didn't check or ignorance, the superior who need to approve the artwork (if any), the printer, production, and lastly the personnel at the cinema.

Anyway, we all make mistakes. If only there is compliance to a proper control process, personnel who are more alert or maybe more time were given to designer (whom might be too exhausted with too many deadlines to fulfill until their quality is being compromised), the error could have been corrected before it goes public.

Somehow, I belief in this: "Fast, Good and Cheap - we can only pick TWO". What say you?