Posted: November 17th, 2022

Summative Assessment for Module 3: Common pitfalls

Summative Assessment for Module 3: Common pitfalls (and how to avoid them!)
Pitfall 1: LOs are not SMART
Think carefully about the verbs you use to define your LO. An LO is unlikely to demonstrate the
characteristics of SMART goals if it begins with “to understand” or “to consider” as they are not
particularly measurable; they are internal to the learner. Instead, think about measurable behaviours
the learners will exhibit that demonstrate their understanding/consideration – such as explain,
identify, describe…. etc. This is often particularly important when considering the affective domain –
it is difficult to measure attitudes, but we can certainly measure the behaviours reflective of
underlying attitudes. Appropriately selected verbs should alert the reader to the domain and order
(higher/lower) of learning – even before reading the rest of the sentence!
The following verbs are not action verbs and should be avoided in SMART LOs:
Understand, Believe, Value, Appreciate, Think, Know
Pitfall 2: LOs are over- or under-assessed
Look carefully at your blueprint. Your LOs should each be assessed by at least one technique, and
each technique should be used to assess one LO. If an LO is assessed by only one technique –
consider the potential issues this might pose, bearing in mind factors in the utility index, and
importantly considering opportunities for feedback and remediation if required. Conversely if an LO
is assessed by multiple techniques, consider the advantages and disadvantages of this. In justifying
your choices, think carefully about why you have selected one technique over another for
assessment of a particular LO(s); consider how that technique complements any other techniques
used to assess the same LO.
Pitfall 3: Teaching context is missing
Please provide information about your context – who are your learners (on continuum from novice
to expert), how many learners are being assessed, what are the available resources etc. This
information can be included in your appendix. If you use acronyms, please do not assume the reader
will understand them – they should be explained.
Pitfall 4: Descriptive rather than reflective writing
You should include a brief description of the activity, as well as what you learned – with reference to
underpinning theories – it is not enough to state your skills have improved, elaborate on how this is
demonstrated (i.e. measurable behaviours demonstrating your learning). It is not enough to allude
to concepts; you need to describe how these concepts have been applied to inform/transform your
practice. A key part of reflective practice is to define an action plan, or next steps. Include a
description about what you plan to do to address the challenges you have outlined (personal
development plan). Consider the frameworks you have learned throughout the course- for most
frameworks, description is only the first step, don’t stop there!
To move from description to analysis, follow this or another reflective framework presenting in
Modules 1 through 3:
1. What did you do?
2. How did you do it?
3. Why did you do it? (use the evidence!)
4. Reflect on outcomes.
5. SMART plan for future.
Pitfall 5: equating minimal competence and cut score
A minimally competent learner should be defined as more than just “a learner who achieves the
pass mark”. That pass mark should have been determined based on the definition of minimal
competence! Instead of focusing on a number, instead consider what qualities you would expect the
learner to exhibit – and to what level of proficiency a skill would need to be demonstrated. For
example, a minimally competent intern should be able to cannulate a healthy patient but may
require 2 or 3 attempts. It is often helpful to consider the high stakes situation – what would you
want the learner to achieve before you “sign them off”. Consider the potential consequences if you
certify someone that does not fit this description.
Pitfall 5: Using few/inappropriate references
Reflective writing should include Assessment and analysis, drawing on what you have learned
throughout the course. Statements you make should be backed up with reference to the literature
that has informed your practice. There should be a direct link to the statement and the reference
you have used. The markers are very familiar with the literature and will be aware a citation has
been plugged in inappropriately. Try to use primary sources where possible (i.e. not “iheed 2022”).
Best practice is to support your discussion with reference to peer-reviewed literature rather than
blogs or websites. Make sure to proofread your reference list – check for missing years/pages etc.
Pitfall 6: Forgetting to explain how you’ve drawn from prior learning in the programme
We expect you to mention concepts from previous modules to demonstrate how you have
integrated your learning across the curriculum. For example, although the focus of Module 3 is
assessment, one cannot talk about constructive alignment without discussing the teaching and
learning theories from Module 1 and Professional Identity Formation from Module 2.

Order | Check Discount