Pair Assessment with Coach and Expert Feedback

Close Icon
These competencies are explicitly fostered and described in Competence View.
These competencies are fostered in this course but are not explicitly described in Competence View. Please contact the responsible person for further information. Competencies in grey are fostered in this course but are generally not the focus of Competence View, which focusses on cross-disciplinary competencies.

The Covid-19 pandemic prompted a shift in the assessment of the course "GIST­ Introduction to Geoinformation Science and Technology". The written final exam gave way to an ungraded project work in pairs. For the first time this year, 66 students completed their projects in two sequential but independent parts. The reason for this division was the possibility to provide feedback after the first part, allowing students to benefit more from the feedback and to have a chance for a deeper understanding and integration of the feedback into their work.

All Course Assessments

Overview of the Course

What is the subject context of the course?

Theoretical basics and fundamental concepts of Geographic Information Science (GIS) are implemented and further applied using ArcGIS Software. These concepts are introduced to the students with practical examples and real-world exercises related to their field of study.

What should students learn and be able to do at the end of the course?

Students should be able to:
–  explain the theoretical and conceptual basics of geographic information systems (GIS);
–  perform routine GIS tasks independently using a (commercial) GIS software;
–  identify geographic problems and formulate possible workflows to solve them;
–  identify and acquire geographical data from different sources and use it effectively to solve geographical problems

Why was the specific assessment format chosen?

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the final exam was replaced with an ungraded project taking place at the end of the semester. The project represents intensive work for both the students and for us. However, we still felt that the students did not fully benefit from our feedback, and when the project was over, there was little engagement in trying to understand what could have been done better – the students’ focus had already shifted to the next challenge (e.g. exams, other projects, next semester).

We realized that the feedback was not being applied and was therefore easily forgotten, which matched with the feedback from our students, who often told us that they would appreciate having further opportunities to apply the inputs given. That is why we decided to split the project into two parts, focusing on providing feedback after the first part and being available to discuss not only the feedback but also the application during the second part.

How are students prepared for the assessment?

We have a classic lecture with interactive interactions and a practical class where we offer hands-on training using GIS software to solve spatial problems. The exercises are pedagogically developed in different topics and take place in person. After the theoretical class on the topic, where the basics of the topic are introduced, the exercise is published, and the students have a time frame of two weeks to complete the exercises using the software. During this time, students can choose to be coached in practical classes, or to work independently at their own pace.

Thus, students are continuously prepared for the project throughout the semester by participating in the exercises and by solving eight mandatory assignments for each topic (Moodle quizzes with proposed solutions).

The course is designed to support the development of independence in software skills and to introduce new skills sequentially throughout the semester. The first part of the project evaluates the skills acquired up to the middle of the semester, and the second part deals with the remaining skills, with the possibility of reviewing the first part.

Although the two parts are independent, they accompany the class topics in a progressive manner.

Course Description

Fact Sheet

Resources

Grading and Feedback

Staff Workload (66 Candidates)

Time Staff Investment
Student Coaching 2 x 2 Lessons 2 Lecturers
6 x 2 Practice Lessons 1 Lecturer
2 - 3 Student Teaching Assistants
Rubric Creation 2 - 4 d 2 Lecturers
Evaluation and Writing Feedback on Project Parts 1 and 2 132 h (1 h per Part) 2 - 3 Student Teaching Assistants
Supervising TAs 20 h 1 Lecturer
Overview on written Feedback 0.5 - 1 d 2 Lecturers
Writing Feedback 2 h 1 Lecturer
Providing Oral Feedback 1 Lesson 1 Lecturer
4 h for individual Feedback 2 Lecturers

Extra Information

  • Rubric Creation
    The effort of 2-4 days is required if a template is already available and can be built upon. If a rubric has to be created from scratch, the effort is higher.
  • Providing Oral Feedback
    The written feedback on part 1 and 2 is provided via Moodle:

    • For the detailed feedback on the first part, students have the opportunity to either ask questions during a practice session or even review the project and the correction together. Around 6 groups took advantage of this opportunity this year.
    • The feedback for the second part is more general. Students who would like a more detailed explanation can always contact us.

Shared Experience

How many times has the assessment been conducted in this format?

The assessment of the project has been conducted for three years with good feedback from the students. Autumn 2024 was the first year that the project was split into two parts. The feedback was predominantly positive.

What contributed to the success?

The project provides an open topic, in which the students have to formulate their own geographical question to be answered. It gives students the freedom to pursue their own interests while using the knowledge they have acquired during the semester to look at the world from a geographical perspective. Besides practical formulation, the project guides them into a practical application of the basic concepts, providing the opportunity to explore real-world problems and common challenges such as data acquisition and preparation. Students are made aware of the effort and time involved in data acquisition, which is often underestimated. These insights, gained under supervision, are very valuable for later Bachelor’s and Master’s thesis and for their future endeavors.

The coaching throughout the project allows space to discuss ideas and to make sure there is continuous progress. Since the project is only conceptual, we can really evaluate if the basic concepts are understood and where more support is needed, without focusing too much on the technical skills which are evaluated in the exercise quizzes.

Although the overall outcome has been very positive so far, and the projects show very creative ideas on spatial issues. There are usually 1-2 projects per semester that do not meet the expectations. These groups have the chance to revise the project after feedback.

What were the challenges and how were they overcome?

We realized that our feedback at the end of the project did not have much impact on the students’ learning, either because their minds were already in the next challenge or because there was no actual application of the feedback given. By splitting the project into two parts and giving the first feedback after the first part and discussing it in class, the feedback is well received and often applied in the second part of the project, making the understanding of the concepts much more effective.

We knew from the beginning that we wanted the project to have an open topic, so that students could apply the content of the course to their own interests and have a higher engagement. However, this brought a number of challenges, as we needed to make sure that the assessment was fair and that the feedback involved still a manageable amount of work. The solution found was to create a pre-structured Word document that provides the structure for the project and also works as a guide for their process. Inevitably, this document took a lot of thought and effort to make it easy to correct, fair to evaluate and yet a guideline for a wide range of topics.

Are there any further developments planned?

Over time, we have noticed that the course has a lower priority because it is not graded. This does not necessarily mean that students are not interested in the course, because we do feel there is an engagement and even interest in pursuing further work (e.g. Bachelors’ and Masters’ theses) in Geographic Information Systems (GIS). And although GIS is currently an elective course, our previous students point out that GIS is one of the most used skills after graduation. However, between a graded course and an ungraded course, the ungraded course often gets less attention simply because the amount of effort invested past a certain point does not make a difference in their outcome in terms of grades. This is a paradigm that we have observed over the last few years, and it is the reason why we are planning to introduce grading of the project work. Additionally, because of changing the course into a graded version, we are currently discussing whether to replace part 2 of the project work with an exam in which students must apply their theoretical knowledge by interpreting practical exercises. This would ensure that the evaluation (grade) is fair for all students and that the learning objectives are achieved by each student individually.

We are also planning to make our content even more competence-based, and to that end we will be making adjustments to the lecture material in particular.

What tips would you give lecturers who are planning a similar assessment?

The project involves a lot of effort and given the resources available, the project must be carried out in groups of two. We recommend dividing the students into groups as soon as it is clear who will definitely be participating in the course. In the past, we have let students create their own groups, but this often leads to discussion. So just be clear from the beginning to give them space to organize their schedules.

Another tip we can give is to create conceptual projects if possible. This takes the focus off the outcome and puts it on the process. While it can sound strange that the result is not the deciding factor in the end, it adds a lot of value from the pedagogical side. Having a guided process organized in this way takes the stress off the software application of the workflow and ensures that the students think through their solution and organize their data structure in a logical way, which is very valuable for their future work.

The students liked the fact that they had to think through the given steps themselves and get feedback in the lecture.
Monika Anna Maria Niederhuber

ETH Competence Framework

Subject-specific Competencies

  • Concepts and Theories (assessed)
  • Techniques and Technologies (assessed)

Method-specific Competencies

  • Decision-making (assessed)
  • Problem-solving (assessed)

Social Competencies

  • Cooperation and Teamwork (fostered)

Personal Competencies

  • Creative Thinking (fostered)

Overview of the ETH Competence Framework

loading