Strategies from McGill instructors
How can you design assessment tasks that enhance students’ learning and motivation to learn? Take a look at these examples from McGill instructors for inspiration. Note that the assessment tasks can be adapted for implementation in courses taught on campus, in a blended manner, and fully online.
10 questions, 10 answers
Instructor: William Archambault
Course: Pharmacology for Nursing 1 & 2 (NUR1 300 & 301)
Department and Faculty: Ingram School of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine
Summary: Students read 4–7 assigned scientific articles to find answers to 10 questions.
Admission ticket assignment
Instructor: Laura Madokoro
Course: Canada Since 1867 (HIST 203)
Department and Faculty: History and Classical Studies, Faculty of Arts
Summary: In preparation for class discussion, students write thought-provoking questions (max. 150 words) about assigned readings and submit them at the beginning of class as “admission tickets.” The instructor selects questions from exemplary admission tickets to include in the midterm and final exams.
Audio recorded micro lectures
.png?inst-v=e512022a-86a6-4d4a-ac49-930474cd8a0f)
Instructor: Tari Ajadi, Assistant Professor
Course: The Politics of Black Canada (POLI 427)
Department and Faculty: Political Science, Faculty of Arts
Summary: Students explain and personalize their conceptual understanding of theoretical aspects of the course in a three-minute audio recording. This “authentic,” real-world assessment task can help prepare students for navigating a world where communication is often done in three-minute spurts.
Goals
Ensure that students can synthesize and analyze course theory, while allowing the instructor to address or clarify misunderstandings
Find a means for students to engage personally and creatively with dense theoretical content
Provide students with the opportunity to practice their communication skills—talking clearly and from their own perspective—for three minutes in an “authentic” or real-life assessment task
“Providing the opportunity to express themselves in a personalized recording gives many students more confidence to speak up in class.” - Tari Ajadi
Steps
Expectations around the assessment task are shared in class with an opportunity for students to ask questions.
Students receive three broad prompts, detailed written instructions, and a rubric on myCourses.
Students submit:
a three-minute audio recording based on personal experience and substantiated with course theory
a script of their micro lecture
a bibliography and, optionally, any creative work that might help to better explain and conceptualize how they approach the theoretical concepts in their micro lecture.
The instructor devotes time in class and during office hours to providing students with feedback on their ideas. This feedback is verbal and individual.
Students submit recordings and supplementary materials on myCourses.
The instructor provides summative feedback on myCourses by filling in the rubric and adding comments.
Assessment
The assessment task is worth 15% of the final course grade.
Insufficient (0%) | Satisfactory (50%) | Good (75%) | Excellent (85%) |
Micro lecture is either incomplete or does not engage with course content or associated themes. | Micro lecture is sufficient length; minimal engagement with and exploration of course content and themes; little attempt at creative expression. | Micro lecture is sufficient length; some engagement with and exploration of course content and themes; some attempt at creative articulation of ideas. | Micro lecture is sufficient length; extensive engagement with and exploration of course content and themes; creative articulation of ideas; connects contextual and theoretical knowledge to articulate distinct position related to questions asked. |
Ready to try it out? Here’s some advice …
Assign the micro lecture early in the term to engage students with course materials from the start.
Give students plenty of formative feedback before the assessment task due date so that they are reassured about the approach they have taken.
Keep the weight of the assessment task relatively low so that students are incentivized to try something new without too much risk.
Practice on a small scale when starting out with this assessment strategy. Consider letting students choose this assessment task from among two or more equivalent options.
Benefits
Students:
better understand the place of personal experience in the political; that is, that there are multiple ways to contribute meaningfully to a broader understanding of phenomena of our social world, and of social and political theory.
feel ownership over what they produce, which allows them to engage with the assessment task without fear of being “wrong.”
spend more time on this assignment (e.g., producing multiple drafts) than on others since they must synthesize their ideas in only three minutes.
are excited to engage with a different kind of assessment task that has an “authentic,” real-world component. Students and the instructor are motivated by seeing progress in students meeting the instructor’s expectations, understanding course concepts, and integrating knowledge.
Challenges
The creative and personalized nature of the task makes it more difficult to assess than if you were to judge only students’ understanding of course content. Providing feedback alongside a rubric can help students understand where they exceeded expectations or where there was room for improvement and can allow for more personalized responses to students.
Developing a rubric is challenging because when you design an assessment task that is sufficiently diffuse, it is difficult to define or pinpoint excellence and lack of success. Working to improve the rubric as an assessment tool has been a means to (partially) overcome this challenge.
Ensuring sufficient time for offering students support and feedback given the novelty of the task can be difficult.
Brief communication
Instructor: Gigi Luk
Course: Theories of Human Development (EDPE 502)
Department and Faculty: Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, Faculty of Education
Summary: In 400–500 words, students summarize a course reading for a target audience of their choice and add their own interpretation of the main ideas.
Collaborative quizzes
Instructor: David Titley-Peloquin
Course: Physics 1 (AEPH 113) and Physics 2 (AEPH 115)
Department and Faculty: Bioresource Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Summary: Collaborative quizzes are an exam preparation activity with an opportunity for immediate feedback. Students attempt a quiz independently and then work in groups of 2-3 students to re-attempt the same quiz. This process allows students to check their understanding with peers.
Fake news assignment
Instructor: Elena Obukhova
Course: Managing Globalization (MGPO 469)
Department and Faculty: Strategy and Organization, Desautels Faculty of Management
Summary: This assignment addresses the concept of “fake news,” a term that refers to bias in the media and the purposeful misleading of media consumers. Using one actual news article, students write a biased news story from a specific stakeholder perspective that illustrates the bias in their story. The focus on bias teaches students to interrogate their sources.
Flexible formative assessments
Instructor: Jasmin Chahal, Assistant Professor
Course: Introductory Immunology: Elements of Immunity (MIMM 214)
Department and Faculty: Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
Summary: Students complete formative assessment tasks to integrate their knowledge of complex concepts, demonstrate their learning in different ways, and prepare for exams. (Strategy inspired by former McGill instructor Dr. Claire Trottier)
Goals
Ensure students stay on track with their learning; that is, help students process what was taught in class and integrate the knowledge to better prepare them for the exams, as well as to help clarify the complex material covered in class
Encourage different study methods and tools to integrate a lot of complex material
Stimulate critical thinking about the immune system that moves beyond repeating the information learned in class
“As students complete more of the formative assessments, I can see that they are progressing in terms of meeting my expectations, their understanding, and just the overall integration of their knowledge.” - Jasmin Chahal
Steps
The instructor introduces the formative assessment tasks during lecture at the start of the term.
Students review a document on myCourses with the instructions, assessment criteria, and marking rubric.
Students are provided with examples of each formative assessment task type along with the instructions and deadlines throughout the term.
Students are encouraged to work and study in teams but must submit their formative assessment tasks individually via myCourses.
TAs assess with a guide to assessment criteria and a bank of comments they can draw on to give students feedback.
Assessment
10 formative assessment tasks throughout the term make up 10% of the final grade.
Each one is worth two points and students can earn zero, one, or two points out of two.
Points are cumulative until they reach a maximum of 10. Students can choose whether they want to do all 10 assessment tasks.
Students can complete a formative assessment task past the deadline, but the most points they can get would be 1/2.
Ready to try it out? Here’s some advice …
Keep it simple the first time you try this strategy. Start small and add more options (e.g., allowing students to submit after the deadline) as you feel more comfortable.
Allow students the option of deciding which formative assessment tasks they complete and/or whether to do them at all.
Try your version of these formative assessment tasks three times and then make changes based on your experiences and feedback from students and TAs.
Benefits
Students and the instructor are motivated by seeing progress in students meeting the instructor’s expectations, understanding course concepts, and integrating knowledge.
Students not only learn from the formative assessment tasks but also enjoy doing them.
Low stakes and multiple chances to get full marks increase students’ willingness to take risks and try new things.
Choice in completing all or some tasks gives students a sense of agency, which can motivate them to persist with learning tasks.
The variety of assessment tasks allows students to practice different skills and express their creativity.
Challenges
The logistics are complicated, and students can get confused about what is expected of them, especially at the beginning of the term. In-class explanations and regular reminders for students to refer to the written instructions help keep students on track.
This type of assessment task can also be new for TAs, so they will need training to be able to assess students’ work.
Group term project (with detailed instructions and rubrics)
Instructor: Sébastien Jodoin
Course: Sustainable Development 3.0 (LAWG 502)
Department and Faculty: Faculty of Law
Summary: In this course, students complete a Group Term Project (3-5 students per group). They choose one of three options for the project: (1) create a business plan or model for a new social enterprise; (2) draft an innovative policy proposal; or (3) draft a memo outlining a new avenue of strategic public interest litigation in the field of sustainable development. The course outline contains specific instructions and unique grading rubrics for each project option. Groups submit a 1-page brief early in the term and receive feedback from the instructor before moving forward with their projects.
Hands-on creative project
Instructor: Catherine Bradley
Course: Special Topics in Theatre History: History of Costume from 1800 to 1970 (ENGL 486)
Department and Faculty: Department of English, Faculty of Arts
Summary: Students have the option to do either a creative project or write an academic paper that expands upon and further explores an aspect of course content. The creative project illustrates a concept or thesis through various physical media that may be technology-based, craft-based, or graphic, and includes a 3–5 page written report.
In-class debate
Instructor: Sergio Burgos
Course: Carbohydrate and Lipid Metabolism (ANSC 551)
Department and Faculty: Animal Science, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Summary: In teams, students prepare arguments, supported by evidence, for and against a controversial topic. The position students argue is decided by a coin toss. Audience members participate in polling, discussion, and evaluation.
In-class simulation
Instructor: Pierre Forest
Course: Total Compensation and Rewards (CORG 562)
Department and Faculty: Career and Professional Development, School of Continuing Studies
Summary: This in-class activity simulates a common work situation: asking for a raise or responding to an employee’s request for a raise. Students work in teams to prepare for both roles in the simulation, as they don’t know in advance which role they will assume. In a post-activity debrief, the class reflects on the instructor’s feedback and makes connections between the activity and course content.
Lay translation assignment
Instructor: Terry Hébert
Course: Research Topics in Pharmacology (PHAR 508)
Department and Faculty: Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine
Summary: Students read a piece of scientific scholarship and write a one-page essay in the style of a New York Times article that makes the content understandable to lay readers. A panel of lay readers provides students with feedback on the effectiveness of their communication. Students revise their work based on this feedback and then submit their revised writing to the instructor.
Letter to stakeholders
Instructor: Kellina L. Higgins
Course: Ecosystem Management (ENVB 415)
Department and Faculty: Department of Natural Resource Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Summary: In groups of two or three, students draft letters to members of government to persuade them to adopt a policy. Students write from different stakeholder perspectives (e.g., economic, social, environmental).
Mineralogy paper
Instructor: George McCourt
Course: Geosystems (SOIL 300)
Department and Faculty: Natural Resource Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Summary: Students complete a written assignment about a mineral or rock of their choice. This assignment can take any written form that the student wishes: research paper, narrative essay, newspaper opinion piece, or poem. The instructor provides students with three specific points that they must address, regardless of the form of the written assignment, along with detailed instructions and assessment criteria.
Multi-stage assignments: The “Explainer Article”
Instructor: Diane Dechief
Course: Communicating Science (CCOM 314)
Department and Faculty: McGill Writing Centre, School of Continuing Studies
Summary: Students develop their writing and critical thinking skills through multiple stages of feedback. As the first step of the “Explainer article” assignment, each student chooses a peer-reviewed journal article in their area of interest. The student then “translates” key aspects of this article into a 500-600-word newspaper-style explainer article, targeted for a general audience. Students submit their writing in four stages and receive feedback at each stage either from peers or the instructor.
Peer assessment
Instructor: Lawrence Chen
Course: Introduction to the Engineering Profession (FACC 100)
Department and Faculty: Electrical and Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering
Summary: Using software that supports peer assessment, students submit their writing, review peers’ work, receive feedback from peers, and use the feedback to revise their writing. In addition, students provide feedback on the feedback they received (known as “back evaluation”).
Performance-based assessment (PBA)
Instructor: Claire Trottier
Course: Laboratory in Immunology (MIMM 385)
Department and Faculty: Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Science
Summary: Performance-based Assessment (PBA) promotes the development of discipline-specific “soft skills,” such as properly using equipment and communicating respectfully with peers. In this course, students have multiple opportunities to practice skills that are relevant to both the course and future work environments. Students complete three PBAs throughout the term, receiving detailed feedback and comments on each one.
Poster presentation assignment
Instructors: John Stix and John Gyakum
Course: Natural Disasters (ATOC 185/EPSC 185)
Department and Faculty: Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences/Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Faculty of Science
Summary: Students summarize and communicate scientific information in a setting that simulates a research conference. In groups of 6, students prepare scientific posters to present at scheduled sessions throughout the semester. Students receive feedback from peers and from the TA, who also assigns a grade.
Presenting papers conference-style
Instructor: Stephen Peters
Courses: Critical Discourse Studies in Education (EDEC 627)
Department and Faculty: Department of Integrated Studies in Education, Faculty of Education
Summary: During an in-class mock conference, students present the content of their final paper prior to the due date. They receive feedback from the instructor and peers that they can use to further organize their thoughts and refine their work.
Recognizing biases
.png?inst-v=e512022a-86a6-4d4a-ac49-930474cd8a0f)
Instructors: Alissa Levine, Faculty Lecturer; co-instructor Pascaline Kengne Talla, Assistant Professor
Course: Social Justice Seminar (DENT 206)
Department and Faculty: Faculty of Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences
Summary: Students learn to recognize bias and understand the impact it can have on their future professional practice by means of a multipronged assessment strategy that allows for multiple
opportunities to practice with low or no stakes.
Goals
Provide students with the opportunity to reflect on who they are and how they might self-assess, as well as to reflect on the experience of recognizing what bias teaches them
Help students understand how their personal identities contribute to their professional identities
Equip students with an understanding of the process of recognizing bias so they can appreciate and account for forms of bias that are often implicit and/or subtle
“The self-assessment component gets students to recognize their own thought processes, which is another part of the journey into recognizing what the components of bias are.” - Alissa Levine
Steps
Part 1. Students do four different self-assessment tasks in sequence. The instructors facilitate discussion after each of the four tasks.
In class, students are shown a picture of Patient A, a blue-skinned cartoonized character. Working with pen and paper, students assess Patient A in terms of their “likeability” (e.g., “Check all that apply: This patient is honest/impolite/kind.”). Students do not submit their work.
Students repeat the exercise with Patient B, a lighter blue-skinned cartoonized character, to raise their awareness about what goes into assessing personal characteristics and being assessed. For example, they respond to the question, “Did it take you longer to say that Patient A versus Patient B was likable?” This exercise helps students learn how subtle forms of bias can be measured. For instance, even if a positive trait is associated with both cartoonized images, bias would be apparent if it took a student longer to check off (i.e., associate) a positive trait with the darker blue cartoonized character.
Students read an article about dentists who are presented with patients understood to be white and black, respectively. Then, students are given corresponding patient charts and must make decisions about diagnosis and treatment, keeping potential biases in mind.
Students are introduced to Project Implicit. They choose and complete one of the online implicit bias tests.
Part 2. Students complete a written individual personal stance. The document should describe their process of reflection on unconscious bias by integrating takeaways from the self-assessment tasks in Part 1 and class discussions.
Assessment
The written assessment task is worth 25% of the final grade. Students are provided with the following assessment criteria and weighting:
Describe societal/family influences on your identity (you could identify an issue that illustrates this influence). | 5% |
Describe ways in which you distinguish yourself as an individual (agency). Identify an issue that illustrates how you have carved out your own identity. | 5% |
Define conscious and unconscious bias. Describe a way in which you were or are biased. | 5% |
Allude to the assigned reading and class discussion. | 5% |
Allude to your experience with the online evaluation. | 5% |
Instructors assign a grade and provide feedback. Note that in the Faculty of Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences, numerical grades allow students to track their progress, but assessment task grades and final grades are reported as pass/fail.
Ready to try it out? Here’s some advice …
Facilitate a safe place where students don’t have to share everything about their self-assessments but rather the process of engaging with potentially difficult self-reflection.
Don’t assess or judge the quality of students’ reflections. Value the process of self-reflection by only assessing students’ self-reporting of the reflection process in their written personal stance.
Benefits
When students become more sensitive to the notion of bias and can recognize how it manifests, they can work to overcome it so that it doesn’t negatively affect their professional practice.
Ideally, students garner self-awareness regarding biases.
Challenges
Students often demonstrate resistance to recognizing their biases or even acknowledging they might hold biases.
Students may feel vulnerable or uncomfortable discussing personal issues; focusing on the process of recognizing biases (as opposed to the biases themselves) is a means to overcome this challenge.
It is difficult for instructors to assess students’ developing awareness of biases, which is why student self-reflection and self-assessment are important.
Review and reading journal
Instructor: Sarah Turner
Courses: Development and Livelihoods (GEOG 310), Geographies of Developing Asia (GEOG 409), and Urban Field Studies (GEOG 494)
Department and Faculty: Department of Geography, Faculty of Science
Summary: In journal entries for a selection of classes, students review class materials and assigned readings, and critique and reflect on their takeaways.
Scientific source evaluation: Short written assignment
Instructors: Sarah Woolley and Tamara Western
Course: Essential Biology (BIOL 115)
Department and Faculty: Department of Biology, Faculty of Science
Summary: Students choose recent, biology-related news articles. In 200 words, they evaluate the reliability of the media source and content.
Two-stage exams
.png?inst-v=e512022a-86a6-4d4a-ac49-930474cd8a0f)
Instructor: Laura Pavelka, Faculty Lecturer
Course: Introductory Organic Chemistry 1 (CHEM 212)
Department and Faculty: Chemistry, Faculty of Science
Summary: Students write an in-person, collaborative mid-term exam in teams followed by an individual exam a few days later. This strategy encourages collaboration and peer to peer learning, while also lowering exam-related stress.
Goals
Allow students to benefit from the discussion and collaboration integral to science that are often missing in large-enrolment STEM courses
Encourage student engagement in a very large class
Promote collaborative learning as students work through conceptual problems together
Remove exam-related anxiety of comparing results with peers when the individual exam precedes the collaborative one
“I feel like a lot of the teamwork has given students some confidence in approaching new ideas and asking questions, and I feel like that is what science is. So that’s a real benefit that I didn’t necessarily anticipate.” - Laura Pavelka
Steps
Students form their own teams of 3-4 students at the start of term.
Students work in these teams weekly during tutorials to familiarize themselves with collaboration strategies and the types of questions to expect in the collaborative exam.
Students receive the instructions for the two-stage exam. The exam has two short-answer questions, is conceptual and closed-book.
Part 1: Students work in their teams to complete the first stage of the in-person mid-term exam. Students:
can work on draft answer booklets but must submit one answer booklet as a team.
are allowed twice the amount of time you think they need to complete the exam.
The instructor grades the exam with the aid of Crowdmark.
Part 2: Students sit an individual exam during an entire class period. The exam consists of 5-7 short-answer questions that are different from those in the collaborative exam but cover similar content in more detail.
TAs use a rubric to grade the individual exam with Crowdmark.
Assessment
The collaborative exam is worth 20% of students’ mid-term grade, with the caveat that it only counts if it improves their grade.
The mid-term grade is worth 20-30% of the final grade (students have some choice).
Ready to try it out? Here’s some advice …
Try it first on a smaller scale to gain confidence and familiarity with the method. For example, consider having students do collaborative quizzes before trying it with an exam.
Allow students to create their own teams and have them collaborate in them consistently over the course of the term. This helps students feel more comfortable as they collaborate on the two-stage exam.
Design the collaborative exam to be broader and more challenging than the individual exam. That way, all students are challenged and must work collaboratively to find the solutions.
Give students twice the amount of time they would need to complete the collaborative component. This accessible assessment strategy promotes learning by allowing all students to work through the answers together without feeling rushed.
During the collaborative exam, be available in the classroom to guide students and TAs with the exam format.
Solicit feedback from students to see what aspects of the exam format need to be changed or tweaked.
Learn from colleagues who have experience with two-stage exams.
Benefits
Students are more engaged with the course content at office hours, during tutorials, and when working with peers.
Students show more confidence in discussing course content with each other and with the instructional team.
More students ask questions. The teamwork gives them confidence in approaching new ideas and asking questions.
Challenges
Initially, when the mid-term exam was scheduled in the evenings, infrastructure was a problem because students were spread out in different rooms and teams and TAs needed guidance. Having students write the collaborative mid-term exam in the same room during class time resolved this issue.
Students need time to feel comfortable working in groups. Working in the same groups throughout the term has helped in this regard.
Providing feedback to so many students can time consuming and pose challenges for grading consistency. Crowdmark proved important for addressing these challenges.
Video assignments
Instructors: Sun-Young Kim and Alejandra Barriales-Bouche
Course: German Language - Intermediate (GERM 307); Spanish Language - Intermediate (HISP 219)
Department and Faculty: Languages, Literatures, and Cultures, Faculty of Arts
Summary: Students video record themselves giving oral presentations that are 1-3 minutes long. They share the videos in myCourses. Instructors view the presentations and provide feedback directly in the video. Students view peers’ videos and record 1-1.5 minute commentaries on selected videos, which they also share in myCourses.
Video demo showcase
Instructor: Eve Lee
Course: Physics of Fluids (PHYS 432)
Department and Faculty: Department of Physics, Faculty of Science
Summary: Students work in pairs to create an educational video that demos a topic related to the course.
Have a question that was not answered in this article? Visit our FAQs.
While this resource is accessible worldwide, McGill University is on land which has served and continues to serve as a site of meeting and exchange amongst Indigenous peoples, including the Haudenosaunee and Anishinabeg nations. Teaching and Learning Services acknowledges and thanks the diverse Indigenous peoples whose footsteps mark this territory on which peoples of the world now gather. This land acknowledgment is shared as a starting point to provide context for further learning and action.
McLennan Library Building 3415 McTavish Street Suite MS-12(ground level), Montreal, Quebec H3A 0C8 | Tel.: 514-398-6648 | Fax: 514-398-8465 | Email: tls@mcgill.ca