Claire will be hosting a conversation around the theme of 'Issues of assessing non-traditional coursework in inquiry-based learning'.

I was one of the people who suggested to Phil Levy that a more collaborative and less ‘transmissive’ mode of communication at conferences would be preferable, so was not surprised that she asked me to host one of the 3 sessions. I did not know what to expect, but knew that I was rather bored of giving and listening to ‘normal’ presentations. So, no Powerpoint, hurray!! I duly wrote a 5 minute introduction, and turned up, to find that there was only one other person there, plus a student ambassador. Normally this would have been very disappointing, and counted as a ‘failure’ of some sort, but we had a brilliant conversation, and everyone felt enriched.

George did not know what the subject of the conversation was, as it was not on the timetable, so came out of curiosity about what a hosted conversation was, as much as anything.We talked about some ‘professional conversations’ he had hosted, at Sceptre in the University of Surrey, and I talked about Nadine Will’s lunchtime workshops here, and how academics really enjoyed the opportunity to talk to colleagues in an informal, loosely structured setting.

Our conversation covered the need to talk to students, the concept of the ‘one hour lecture’ as unit of labour for academics, the transition from school to university, and group work and its validity as a more ‘real-life’ experience, before meandering its leisurely way towards the subject for discussion – issues of assessing non-traditional coursework in IBL. George started by saying that he had not changed his methods of assessment much, it was the way he taught, not the subject matter that had changed, before describing some newer practice - learning logs, and reflections (and critical reflections) on learning logs.

I talked about my experiences of using learning journals and portfolios with students, and the questions that arise around assessment when asking students to make films  (or use other electronic media) as part of their course.

Ally, the student ambassador also took part in the conversation, describing how she felt about different types of assessment, essay vs project work. She talked about feedback on essays, saying that often, by the time you get feedback from the first essay on a module, you are already writing the second, and under too much pressure to really act on the feedback given. She said that project work tended to be better spaced across the module. She gave a really interesting example of project work from her course, where week by week, the lecturer gave students papers written about a fossil in the chronological order they were written, so students had to piece the argument together gradually, charting the development of thinking about the fossil, rather than just reading the most up to date writings.

The conversation then went back to discuss critical thinking, and definitions thereof, before ending on the merits of debating societies!

Everyone always says that the best parts of conferences are the ‘bits in-between’ the formal sessions. This is a good way of combining both. The people who come to a session usually have a great deal of knowledge of the subject area, so better to share it, than sit as passive spectators – it’s a bit like practicing what you preach in L&T!