Digital Assessment Session Feedback

Document created by mb27350 on May 17, 2018Last modified by mb27350 on May 17, 2018
Version 2Show Document
  • View in full screen mode

In the session we asked for contributions from attendees regarding what they see as the main issues regarding digital assessment and below are the highlights:

  • proper anon/pastoral care
  • moderation
  • Moderation
  • More roles in TII (e.g. Instructor, admin, students)
  • Easier linking to text matching
  • large files
  • Tii originality checking within the Bb assignment workflow
  • .admin roles and tasks
  • Clearer agreed terminology for vendors / users (assessment wizards for different assessment scenarios)
  • self/peer assessment workflow 
  • agreed range of grading options for markers
  • Delegated/moderated grading - more online guidance with tools that support this
  • Easy Workflows for moderation


Link to the session whiteboard notes


Tops 3


  • does this mean delegated grading, external examiner review, reconciliation, double bind .....)


  • Admin role to allow for pastoral care and check who or who hasn’t submitted


  • this entails of easier linking to similarity reports in the assignment process, simpler workflows to accommodate different submission processes and wizards to help users navigate the assignment experience.

What Next?

We need to clarify and agree on moderation as this term covers numerous strands. So what do you mean by moderation? Please give an example in the comment section?

This info will be shared with the Scottish account manager (Alistair Brook) and Gillian Fielding.