Ïã¸ÛÁùºÏ²Ê

Dr Rochelle Burgess (Ïã¸ÛÁùºÏ²Ê Institute for Global Health) describes her experience of introducing weekly online discussion forum posts as part of students' summative assessment.

In the video and case study below, Dr Rochelle Burgess, Associate Professor in Global Health (Ïã¸ÛÁùºÏ²Ê Institute for Global Health) describes why and how theÌýGLBH0020 module team introduced a summatively assessed online discussion forum into this master's-level module.

MediaCentral Widget Placeholder

---

Marking online discussion forums

What we did

GLBH0020: Power and Politics in Global HealthÌýis a Master's level module that introduces students to the ways in which global health is influenced by power, explores case studies, and provides analytical tools for examining the politics of global health. It is compulsory for students on the MSc/PG Dip Global Health and Development, and is open to any other Ïã¸ÛÁùºÏ²Ê MSc/PG Dip students, Taster course students and Short course students.

The module team created an assessment that uses a student discussion forum to facilitate conversations around module related resources and content, such as video. Regular forum posts and responses to peers' posts are marked andÌýweighted as 10% of the final module mark.ÌýÌý

Why we did it

We initially took this approach during the pivot to fully online teaching and assessment during the pandemicÌýand it has sinceÌýbeen refined to suit a return to more face-to-face practice and student feedback.Ìý

This is a core module on the programme and it moves quickly; there are two lectures per week over five weeks.The main driver for including assessed online discussion forums was our desire toÌýsupport students with some of the key skills required on the module including forming and defending arguments, critical analysis and essay writing. These are skills needed in the final summative assessment and often lacking in students with a pure science background. We wanted to create a space where students could think a bit more deeply about these big ideas and talk to each other about them in a facilitated space. Ìý

We created an assessment that would increaseÌýengagement with and participation in the module and module themes. It would also help us to see how students are progressing inÌýin their ability to form arguments and use class material to defend arguments before the final essay assessment. Ìý

How we did itÌý

We integrated participation in online Moodle discussion forums into the overall module mark. Students were required to post their own post and respond meaningfully to at least one post from another studentÌýevery other week.Ìý The total marks across all posts are weighted as 10% of the final module mark.ÌýThere are three tasks in total, taking 1-3 hours for each activity.ÌýStudents post anonymously with their candidate number. Ìý

Each post gets a mark out of 10. There are fiveÌýdifferent criteria worth up to two marks each. The first four critieraÌýare linked to the main essay writing criteria we use in final assessments and across the programme, e.g. clarity of expression, appropriate use of evidence etc. The fifth one is for participation; students need to have responded in some meaningful way to receive those marks.

The entire module team has been involved, in partilcular, myself,ÌýProfessor Sarah Hawkes, administrator Catherine Ford and the administrative team.Ìý

One of the novel aspects of the approach has been an interactive rubric designed by the course administrator.ÌýIn the Excel interactive rubric, a link to each Moodle forum post is listed alongside the candidate number. Ìý

The marks and written feedback for each post is then shared with the student. Ìý

Student response

Students really enjoy the assessment and it has helped with summative essay assessment grades. It really forces students who might not have experience outside of hard sciences to review their writing and get some feedback on it. Ìý

We were initially conscious of potential for inflation of marks but it didn’t happen so we assume we have pitched it at the right weighting (10%) -Ìý enough for people to care about but not so much that it skews the overall mark. Ìý

Challenges

We started off doing off one post per week, but feedback from students was that although they really liked the approach and it kept them engaged, it was too frequent alongside other content. ÌýThis year, we reduced it from five to three posts throughout the module.Ìý

Although the postsÌýare small (200-250 words excl. references), this approach has been time intensive so would probably work well on smaller modules. It does need quite a few people to mark it (we had four people).Ìý

Future plans

We are discussing how weÌýbalanceÌýthe time and labour required with the benefits that students get. WeI thought initially about peer marking but I don’t think it’s the right fit for this, asÌýwe want that diagnostic aspect of the feedback. Ìý

We will continue with this approach but weÌýare thinking about designing new ways for doing the marking.Ìý

“If you have a theoretical module a lot of times those theories don’t change, but you make things more relevant to what is happening public sphere of the moment with these forum questions.ÌýItÌý will be interesting to see what topics we get people to look at next year because it will reflect what the world looks like at that time - Professor Rochelle Burgess.Ìý