ABSTRACT
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a change in the mode of delivery of most of our teaching programs. Within a few months, academics responded to the lack of contact with students by generating and using online content to deliver their modules. Even before this forced change, curricula had already undergone significant development. But whereas teaching methods had morphed over time, learning approaches and assessment strategy remained stagnant. The change to online teaching and assessment during the pandemic revealed that in many modules, assessments are still testing at low cognitive levels, rewarding recall instead of understanding. It also revealed that plagiarism and collusion in online assessments were rife, and the type of assessments offered created an enabling environment for this. Students seldom engage with the course material during the semester, except for assignments. Almost all learning occurs in the short period before the main exam session (or in recent years, with the possibility of deferring exams, the students can extend this period into the supplementary session). The change to continuous assessment placed an unusual strain on students accustomed to this particular learning style. They were now forced to engage with material throughout the semester. In this study the student network was considered. Counter intuitively, this has actually strengthened as a result of the pandemic, with students using a variety of communication platforms to engage with one another. As part of this work, the informal study groups and other partnerships that have arisen were investigated as a means to support the formal teaching program. A system based on peer-to-peer interaction was piloted in an undergraduate chemical engineering program, over two modules at the third- and fourth-year levels. The system awards points for various peer activities that usually occur in an informal way, which can be translated into bonus marks on assessments. In doing so, the system addressed a potentially contentious but powerful supposition, i.e. is there a way to exploit the knowledge sharing potential of plagiarism and collusion for a better purpose? Such systems have traditionally been used in businesses and large corporations to motivate and reward employees. The recent pilot has demonstrated that the system, as implemented within an undergraduate program and linked to assessments that test at higher cognitive levels, can improve student engagement and performance. © 2022 IEEE.
ABSTRACT
The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a change in the mode of delivery of most of our teaching programs. Within a few months, academics responded to the lack of contact with students by generating and using online content to deliver their modules. Even before this forced change, curricula had already undergone significant development. But whereas teaching methods had morphed over time, learning approaches and assessment strategy remained stagnant. The change to online teaching and assessment during the pandemic revealed that in many modules, assessments are still testing at low cognitive levels, rewarding recall instead of understanding. It also revealed that plagiarism and collusion in online assessments were rife, and the type of assessments offered created an enabling environment for this. Students seldom engage with the course material during the semester, except for assignments. Almost all learning occurs in the short period before the main exam session (or in recent years, with the possibility of deferring exams, the students can extend this period into the supplementary session). The change to continuous assessment placed an unusual strain on students accustomed to this particular learning style. They were now forced to engage with material throughout the semester. In this study the student network was considered. Counter intuitively, this has actually strengthened as a result of the pandemic, with students using a variety of communication platforms to engage with one another. As part of this work, the informal study groups and other partnerships that have arisen were investigated as a means to support the formal teaching program. A system based on peer-to-peer interaction was piloted in an undergraduate chemical engineering program, over two modules at the third- and fourth-year levels. The system awards points for various peer activities that usually occur in an informal way, which can be translated into bonus marks on assessments. In doing so, the system addressed a potentially contentious but powerful supposition, i.e. is there a way to exploit the knowledge sharing potential of plagiarism and collusion for a better purpose? Such systems have traditionally been used in businesses and large corporations to motivate and reward employees. The recent pilot has demonstrated that the system, as implemented within an undergraduate program and linked to assessments that test at higher cognitive levels, can improve student engagement and performance. © 2022 IEEE.