Close
What was the context for the collaboration?
Lecturers on the Planetary Economics and the Political Economy and Energy of Climate Change module, part of the BSEER programme, introduced a new format for their final exam.
Previously students had written an essay, and this was now changing to an oral assessment. Rather than a presentation, the format of the oral exam was for the student to engage in conversation with the examiners on a question they only received during the oral itself.听
What did we do?
Initially the module lead contacted the ACC for broad advice on oral communication assessment and suggestions for how they might help their students to prepare.
These first meetings took place in early September with the exam set to run in early February. Out of the first conversations we agreed a plan to run two preparation workshops in late December and early January.
These workshops aimed firstly, to prepare students with strategies to parse questions and organise their argument; secondly, to role-play the exam; and thirdly, to provide a framework for further revision and practice centred around the content of their course.
We worked closely with the module lead and two PGTAs who would be assisting in running the exams. The ACC was given access to the module Moodle site, where we researched the structure, content and current support in place for the students.
We then went back to the module team with further questions, a rough plan for the workshops and requests for content which could be used in the workshops. The PGTAs recorded 鈥渆xemplar鈥� answers for analysis. We co-created revision prompts and strategies tailored to the module content.
The workshops were compulsory and timetabled into the module鈥檚 teaching schedule. They were co-taught on campus by ACC lecturers and either the module lead or module PGTAs.
After the first cycle of the exams, we held review meetings to get feedback from students, the module lead and the PGTAs who had run the exams.
As a result, the form and content of the workshops were adapted, and further opportunities for oral practice were added by the modules leads. The workshops are now in their third year.
What factors made this an effective intervention?
The collaborative work with the module leads and PGTAs was essential for the workshops to be effective.
For example, certain activities in the workshop revealed issues with the assessment structure that needed fine tuning and were then addressed before the exam.
The presence of the module leads and PGTAs in the workshops made this realisation much more immediate. Thus, there was a beneficial feedback loop between the support for the students in preparing for the assessment, and the assessment design.
This also allowed the workshops to very effectively support the students, familiarising them with the assessment, reducing anxiety, and helping them prepare effectively.
In summary, the engagement of the module leads in providing materials and resources, co-creating and delivering the sessions, and responding to feedback made this intervention engaging and effective.听
What our staff and students say
鈥淭his was very helpful and [I] have a much better idea about what the exam will entail and how to prepare for it.鈥�鈥�
鈥溾�ives detailed information about what the oral assessment looks like and what we are expected according to the marking criteria.鈥�鈥�
鈥淢akes you more confident about speaking to others and also makes you aware of gaps in your knowledge.鈥�鈥�