“Space within the space”. The complexity of assessment from differing dialogues. How to mediate judgement with international partners.

TY - GEN

T1 - “Space within the space”. The complexity of assessment from differing dialogues. How to mediate judgement with international partners.

AU - Murray, Alison

AU - Shaughnessy, Julie

PY - 2019/6/10

Y1 - 2019/6/10

N2 - We have selected the ambiguity as a frame of complexity to enable us to identify pedagogical features in the curriculum for the dissertation and to consider more fully their potential for creating further criticality. We believe that as we refrain from using traditionally embedded ways of thinking about learning relating to a research dissertation as best organised in a linear series (conceptualised in QAA language), we may be able to open further possibilities differently (through a philosophical lens of complexity) to reflect the interplay between areas of learning and discovery. This will help us to make an innovative shift in thinking about QA. Complexity thinking invites the inspection in more holistic terms across the parts at the system in its entirety (Foote, & Plsek, 2001). Furthermore, we selected one principle of complexity thinking (Davis & Sumara, to situate this analysis. In doing so. we step back from our the QA role (POWER) and QAID roles (to release) and suspend the use of terminology traditionally adopted in the assessment criteria for Masters such as ‘ typically defined assessment criteria e.g. L7 criteria’ and open the possibility for contemplating meanings of criticality (without bounded ideas) (such as the programme; central stakeholder) to the presiding partner programme (the collaborating stakeholder). Furthermore, we selected one principle of complexity thinking (Davis & Sumara, 2006) to situate this analysis. In doing so, we step back from our the QA role (POWER) and QAID roles to release and suspend the use of terminology traditionally adopted in the assessment criteria for Masters such as ‘ typically defined assessment criteria e.g. L7 criteria’ and open the possibility for contemplating meanings of criticality (without bounded ideas) (such as the programme; central stakeholder) to the presiding partner programme (the collaborating stakeholder).

AB - We have selected the ambiguity as a frame of complexity to enable us to identify pedagogical features in the curriculum for the dissertation and to consider more fully their potential for creating further criticality. We believe that as we refrain from using traditionally embedded ways of thinking about learning relating to a research dissertation as best organised in a linear series (conceptualised in QAA language), we may be able to open further possibilities differently (through a philosophical lens of complexity) to reflect the interplay between areas of learning and discovery. This will help us to make an innovative shift in thinking about QA. Complexity thinking invites the inspection in more holistic terms across the parts at the system in its entirety (Foote, & Plsek, 2001). Furthermore, we selected one principle of complexity thinking (Davis & Sumara, to situate this analysis. In doing so. we step back from our the QA role (POWER) and QAID roles (to release) and suspend the use of terminology traditionally adopted in the assessment criteria for Masters such as ‘ typically defined assessment criteria e.g. L7 criteria’ and open the possibility for contemplating meanings of criticality (without bounded ideas) (such as the programme; central stakeholder) to the presiding partner programme (the collaborating stakeholder). Furthermore, we selected one principle of complexity thinking (Davis & Sumara, 2006) to situate this analysis. In doing so, we step back from our the QA role (POWER) and QAID roles to release and suspend the use of terminology traditionally adopted in the assessment criteria for Masters such as ‘ typically defined assessment criteria e.g. L7 criteria’ and open the possibility for contemplating meanings of criticality (without bounded ideas) (such as the programme; central stakeholder) to the presiding partner programme (the collaborating stakeholder).

KW - complexity thinking, quality assurance, assessment masters level

KW - nonlinear

KW - dissertations

M3 - Conference contribution

BT - Learning and Teaching Festival ‘Innovation and Inclusion’. University of Roehampton

PB - Roehampton University

ER -