I came into the Assessment and Feedback module knowing that assessment shaped my students’ learning more powerfully than perhaps anything I taught — and left it with a far more critical, strategic, and inclusive sense of how it could be designed to truly serve that learning.
This was the second module in my PGDip in Policy and Practice in Higher Education. What stood out immediately was the intentional framing: assessment not just as a tool for measuring knowledge, but as a pedagogical act that creates learning. The emphasis throughout the module on why we assess, not just how, helped me shift my thinking — away from inherited formats and toward purposeful, student-centred design.
One of the more meaningful components was the critical appraisal I undertook of an assessment strategy within a module I teach — Applied Sciences in Physiotherapy. This reflective exercise, supported by the CASP tool and feedback sessions, required me to scrutinise the alignment between intended learning outcomes and the methods used to assess them. It became immediately apparent that while the open-book exam and extended essay had a logical place, they didn’t fully reflect the professional demands of practice or the diversity of learner needs. Concepts like authenticity, transparency, and inclusivity — previously familiar but abstract — now felt like urgent imperatives.
In redesigning this strategy, I leaned heavily on literature that highlighted the limitations of summative assessments devoid of meaningful feedback. Scholars like Carless and Boud pushed me to explore the idea of feedback as a dialogic, relational process — not merely information given but transformation enabled. I proposed a revised structure with more immediate formative tasks, greater student choice, and an oral assessment component that would allow students to engage more personally and professionally. The use of peer-led feedback and dialogic frameworks felt not only more human but more effective.
My written submission extended this thinking into a broader reflection on the sector. I examined how assessment intersects with wellbeing, inclusivity, and institutional performance — and how often these tensions are left unresolved. The literature repeatedly warned against the mechanisation of assessment practices and championed feedback literacies, authentic assessment, and formative design. These themes resonated deeply, especially in light of the increasing diversity of student populations and the mental health pressures students face.
Looking back, I think the most profound impact of this module was internal. I became more critical of the assumptions embedded in assessment systems and more confident in challenging them. It also deepened my belief that good assessment practice is good teaching practice — they are inseparable.
Perhaps most importantly, I left with tools and language that I’ve already begun to use in programme discussions. Advocating for assessment literacy at the start of the academic year, initiating conversations about oral vs. written modes of assessment — these aren’t just theoretical exercises anymore. They’re shifts in culture. And I want to be part of making them happen.
Dean Walker 