The need for compassionate assessment 

Since the pandemic, there has been a growing interest in compassionate pedagogy and assessment. The pandemic highlighted the urgency of responding to student wellbeing and discussions on how to support students during this challenging time, leading to critical reflections in the sector about how we might “reimagine assessment for good” (Sambell and Brown, 2021 p.11). Compassionate pedagogy is one of relational education, building relationships with students to notice distress and oppression, and take action to reduce harm. However, the idea of compassionate pedagogy and compassionate assessment are challenging concepts, both conceptually and as something to implement in practice. Quality assurance and regulatory pressure as well as institutional and disciplinary cultures present significant barriers. Andrew et. al. (2023) provide a useful framing of these issues in their editorial ‘The role of compassion in higher education practices’, highlighting the gap between wanting an ethos of compassion and the reality of practice and policy.  

Fairness or equity 

A significant problem with Higher education (HE) assessment policy is that we apply blanket, identical rules that need to cover a wide range of diverse students. When university students were largely homogeneous (many years ago now) this was fine. However, these inflexible approaches based on fairness disadvantage many. As an example, consider policies or practices about giving feedback on draft work. Institutional or local policies often dictate the number of drafts allowed for feedback and the need to apply this ‘fairly’ across the cohort. Below are some anonymous quotes from university policies:  

“Feedback should be constrained by a specific word limit…unit tutors must consistently apply the agreed approach.”  

“Formative feedback on students’ learning is an integral part of the curriculum and its assessment, and contributes to ensuring the integrity of the assessment process. However, only one instance of feedback on any final piece of work for submission is permissible.” 

Some students arrive at university with a good grounding in academic writing and they are likely to need far less help than students who lack confidence and skill in academic writing. Is it fair that everyone gets one chance at feedback regardless of actual need? 

Where is our time, as academics, and our limited resource best spent? This is an example of where fairness gets in the way of equity and consistency overrides compassion. A compassionate approach to assessment would recognise difference and be flexible to the needs of students. 

Stress, anxiety and wellbeing 

A second concern is about the stress and anxiety caused by assessments and how we might mitigate this. The purpose of awarding degrees is that we are certifying that students have learnt certain knowledge and skills but I feel that HE assessment regimes have lost sight of the human element of learning. 

In research we conducted at the University of the Arts London, assessment stress and anxiety was the most prominent feature described by students when talking about assessment and grading. This at a university which had very few exams! Exams seem to create an extra level of stress and anxiety. The recent exam issue at Bath University (not that Bath is doing anything different to any other university) gives an insight into this. Note the contrast in the student concerns and the university concerns: 

Student: “I think the university needs to understand the stress and anxiety, performances are definitely going to fall” 

University: “To ensure quality standards are met…to uphold the quality and integrity of their degree.” 

Where is the acknowledgement of the human cost and distress? Given the growing concerns of the mental wellbeing of students and data that shows that university students have a higher incidence of mental health conditions than the general population, should this be addressed through assessment policy and processes? Assessment policies and practices often do not address wellbeing and mental health. There are some policies which might be considered more compassionate. For example, many universities, allow self-certification for late assessment submission. This reduces the need for students to evidence a short-term illness when that evidence may be difficult to obtain. However, the circumstances in which students can use self-certification are often very limited. Might it not be better to think about more flexibility of deadlines rather than rely on short-term mitigation? Or challenge the assumption that every student should get the same amount of time regardless of need? Is now the time to take a more radical approach to policy and challenge taken for granted assumptions in order to create a more compassionate approach to assessment? 

Is this too radical? 

Our sense of the sector through the work we have been doing on compassion suggests that introducing the compassionate, human element to assessment policy and practice to be on an equal footing to the quality and standards element seems a radical step too far. Please join us in trying to convince our colleagues otherwise! 

Thanks to funding from the QAA, we, have set up a network of colleagues interested in compassionate assessment. The network aims to support each other in bringing about more compassionate practices and policies in assessment in the HE sector. We want to share good practice, resources and policy innovations. If you are interested in joining us please join the JISCmail list We are also hosting regular online events. The next event is the 10^th of May 12noon-1pm (online), click on the booking link to attend. 

References 

Andrew, M.B., Dobbins, K., Pollard, E., Mueller, B., & Middleton, R. (2023). The role of compassion in higher education practices. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20(3), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.3.01    

Baughan, P. (ed.) (2021) Assessment and feedback in a post-pandemic Era: A time for learning and inclusion. York: Advance HE. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/assessment-and-feedback-post-pandemic-era-time-learning-and-inclusion 

Sambell, K. and Brown, S. (2021). ‘Changing assessment for good: building on the emergency switch to promote future-oriented assessment and feedback designs.’ 

Team biographies 

Dr Neil Currant, Senior Lecturer, University of Bedfordshire: 

Neil has been supporting teaching, learning and assessment practices in higher education since 2005. Neil’s doctoral study was on the experiences of belonging for global ethnic majority students in predominately white universities. Neil’s research interests include belonging, assessment, educational leadership, and inclusion. Most recently they were part of a QAA-funded project Belonging through Assessment: pipelines of compassion which led to the current project to build a network for those interested in compassionate assessment. 

Liz Bunting 

Liz is an Educational Developer in the Academic Enhancement team at University of the Arts London, where she supports socially just experiences and outcomes for students. She has an interest in nurturing ecologies of belonging in Higher Education, through relational, compassionate and trauma informed policies and practices. She is a Senior Fellow HEA and a recipient of an Advance HE CATE Award 2020. 

Vikki Hill, Senior Lecturer, Queen Margaret University: 

Vikki is a Senior Lecturer in Learning Enhancement and Academic Development. Vikki has over 20 years’ experience in education and leadership and works with staff and students to develop pedagogy and support equitable outcomes. Much of her academic development practice focuses on compassionate pedagogies, practices and policies. She is a Senior Fellow HEA and a recipient of an Advance HE CATE Award 2020.