Page 216 - Contributed Paper Session (CPS) - Volume 7

CPS2065 Lina Schelin et al.
students’ solution taking the overall perspective into account. Hence, this is
something we decided to incorporate in the examination guide.
During the discussions, we could also identify some other aspects that
should be addressed in an examination guide, mainly related to trivial things,
but still of importance for the students. For example, we realized that some
teachers use a symbol to indicate that something is correct, while others use
the same symbol for the opposite.
The most relevant part of the examination guide that we constructed,
based on the focus group discussions, is the assessment levels (see Table 1).
This is our suggestion on how to go towardsmarking with a general rubric,
while still being able to award each task with a point. The example of a task
given in Figure 1 contains three sub-questions. Our intention is thus that the
assessment levels in Table 1 is used to award the whole task with a point (level),
since all sub-questions cover the same “topic”. A holistic assessment is
simplified if a templet is used in the construction of the exam. Hence, the
examination guide also contains information related to the how the exam
should be constructed (i.e., a short templet).

Table 1. The part of the examination guide that describe the new suggested
predefined levels used for marking the exams. Each level has a short description of the
criteria that should be met, and each level corresponds to a point, resulting in points
with less resolution than we presently use.

LEVEL 1 POINT DESCRIPTION*
Level 1 6 Correct (maximum point)

Level 2 5 Correct, but with a minor mistake.
Level 3 3 Some mistakes, but the solution indicate some understanding.
Level 4 1 Not correct, but the solution includes something to reward.

Level 5 0 Not correct, and includes nothing to reward
*A list exemplifying minor and major mistakes should be attached as a supplement.

During the project, the examination guide was tested in parallel to the ordinary
marking on the course. A simple random sample of 30 exams were marked by
us according to the instructions in the examination guide. The results were
compared to the ordinary marking made by the assessment teamon the
course, see Figure 2.

203 | I S I W S C 2 0 1 9