Call for proposals: USO Education Innovation 2027

Assessment drives learning, it is often claimed. The way in which assessment (testing and grading) is organized at our university can therefore have a major influence on how students learn and prepare for assessment. At the same time, the design and implementation of assessment raises fundamental questions: why do we assess, what do we assess, and how do we assess?

A distinction is made in the literature between formative assessment (aimed at student development) and summative assessment (aimed at selection). Formative assessment is also called assessment for learning (AfL), summative assessment is also called assessment of learning (AoL).

Generally, teachers determine what and how testing and assessment is done, both formative and summative. Student involvement in this process is often limited. However, if students are more prominently involved in testing and grading (for example, through self-assessment and peer assessment) it could enhance student learning and achievement. Greater student involvement in assessment appeals to students' self-regulation skills, which are an important predictor of learning achievement. When students are actively involved in testing and grading, it is also referred to as assessment as learning (AaL).

Within this theme, we are looking for new approaches to feedback and assessment that address fundamental questions about testing and grading (why, what, how). This includes considering the differences in ( need for) assessment between mastering, experience and offering goals, the assessment learning environment, the learning process and learning outcomes. 

We are also looking for ways to shape student engagement in assessment. For example, considering the different roles that students and teachers can play in assessment, the assessment learning environment and the way in which students are sufficiently challenged to become involved in assessment. 

For inspiration, please consult the article by Schellekens et al. (2021).

Reference:
Schellekens, L. H., Bok, G. H. J., de Jong, L. H., van der Schaaf, M. F., Kremer, W. D. J., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2021). A scoping review on the notions of Assessment as Learning (AaL),Assessment for Learning (AfL), and Assessment of Learning (AoL). Studies in Educational Evaluation, 71, 1-15.

The university encourages students to discover and develop their personal and professional identity. Good education is impactful for the student themselves and is thus transformative; the student acquires knowledge, learns to relate to that knowledge, and in the process develops himself as a person. Students develop a critically reflective attitude that will help them meet the societal challenges as the person and professional of tomorrow. 

Learning takes place through interacting with others, engaging in dialogue and reflecting on the other person’s perspective. Skills such as reasoning, verbal communication, seeing things from another’s perspective and debating help to shape students’ ability to engage in constructive, socially oriented dialogue, and also contribute to the Graduate Attributes set out in the Utrecht Education Model.

Within this theme, we are looking for projects that, through the use of dialogue and debate, help students and teachers to find their own place and role in society and to understand how they relate to current societal issues. The emphasis here is not on developing new methods to facilitate dialogue or debate, but on embedding these skills within the curriculum, in line with the nature of the discipline, and ensuring that learning objectives, learning activities and assessment are consistent with one another (constructive alignment).

The committee welcomes proposals aimed at strengthening the above-mentioned skills among both students and teachers. 

Good ideas don't always fit into a box. Therefore, we like to give the opportunity to submit proposals that do not fit one of the above themes. However, a proposal in the free category must be in line with the Strategic Plan 2030 and the Utrecht Educational Model

• To what extent does the project aim to implement an innovative solution or ambitious improvement that meets a need at Utrecht University?
• To what extent does the proposed solution differ from other initiatives at Utrecht University with the same objective? All Previously completed and ongoing USO projects can be found in the CAT Teaching and Learning Collection.
• To what extent does the project fit in with the chosen theme?
• To what extent does the project match the Strategic Plan and Educational model of Utrecht University?

• Does the problem statement convincingly explain in which area of education an improvement is desirable and why?
• Does the applicant make it plausible that the proposed innovation can lead to an improvement (for example, by using relevant literature and examples from practice)?
• Does the applicant describe clearly and methodically how to guide teachers, students and necessary parties towards the desired improvement and needed changes for the innovation?
• Are the intended benefits, such as learning outcomes and concrete products, clearly described? Are they of added value to students and possibly others?
• What is the scope of the project? How many students, teachers, programmes, faculties are reached?
• Does the applicant make it plausible that the project may also be of interest to others outside the consortium?

• Are the activities, methods and planning in the project plan clearly described and are they appropriate for achieving the intended results?
• Do the project plan, the planning and a concise risk analysis convincingly demonstrate the feasibility of the project?
• Have the scope, planning and budget been drawn up realistically?
• Does the project team have the required expertise to carry out the project? Are the various roles and responsibilities clear and appropriate?
• Are the project activities and outputs adequately evaluated, using evaluation criteria and procedures?
• Is the dissemination plan appropriate and sufficiently ambitious?