Assessments for my web design course are finally finished, after a two hour phone meeting with the external examiner. We had 27 students complete the course, and the assessment was budgeted at 90 minutes per student per examiner, which is pretty close to what we actually used, I think. That means that between us we spent 81 hours on grading. That’s more than two weeks full time. Just imagine if we could have spent that time in a way that would have actually had some learning effect for the students! I’m so glad that the system is changing…
Previous Post
assessment ideas Next Post
save /dev/null 3 thoughts on “81 hours”
Leave A Comment Cancel reply
Recommended Posts
Have you tried playing with the mini version of DALL-E yet? It’s fun! What DALL-E does is generate wonderful images from written prompts, using a neural network trained on images scraped from the internet that have English language captions attached to them. […]
Call for submissions to a workshop, Bergen, Norway
Workshop dates: 15-17 August 2022
Proposals due: 15 June
The Machine Vision in Everyday Life project invites proposals for an interdisciplinary workshop using qualitative approaches and digital methods to analyse how machine vision is represented in art, science fiction, games, social media and other forms of cultural and aesthetic expression.
For the Machine Vision in Everyday Life project we’ve analysed how machine vision technologies are portrayed and used in 500 works of fiction and art, including 77 digital games, 190 digital artworks and 233 movies, novels and other narratives. You can browse […]
I think you should learn R! No really – I’ve spent the last 6-7 weeks learning R so I can visualise the data we’ve collected in the Database of Machine Vision in Art, Games and Narratives, and it’s not as hard as […]
I’m a visiting scholar at the University of Chicago this year, affiliated with the Center for Applied AI at Booth School of Business. I’m excited about the opportunity to learn from a different disciplinary approach to AI and machine vision. I discovered […]
I’m giving a talk at an actual f2f academic conference today, Critical Borders, Radical Re(visions) of AI, in Cambridge. I was particularly excited to see this conference because it’s organised by the people who edited AI Narratives A History of Imaginative Thinking […]
torill
May you always be this enthusiastic about the assessment forms the reform brings us. And may your enthusiasm be justified. I think I’ll add that to my daily prayers.
Jill
*grin*
kari
As an American uninitiated in the arcana of European assessment rites, I found your recent entries on student evaluation fascinating. I can’t help but wonder if the Norwegian system, with all its rigour, promotes greater effort on the part of its students than the American system does on its own. Stateside we are afforded a lot of latitude in designing our curricula and developing evaluation criteria, but too often at the cost of rigour. There is a real problem with grade inflation (too many students receiving the highest marks for mediocre work in the absence of real grading standards), and students, for their part, perceiving this laxity on the part of their instructors, often respond to assignments in a lackadaisical spirit. I do hope Norway finds a way to sidestep the shortcomings of the American system in its reform effort. (Which is not to say there aren’t real virtues to our system–there are! I’m constantly inspired by the creativity of my colleagues–just a fair share of pitfalls as well).