Cited by 29Student Assessment and FeedbackScience Education and PedagogyEvaluation of Teaching Practices

Assessing practical laboratory skills in undergraduate molecular biology courses

Hunt, Lynne, Koenders, Annette, Gynnild, Vidar·2012·Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education

Abstract

This study explored a new strategy of assessing laboratory skills in a molecular biology course to improve: student effort in preparation for and participation in laboratory work; valid evaluation of learning outcomes; and students’ employment prospects through provision of evidence of their skills. Previously, assessment was based on written laboratory reports and examinations, not on the demonstration of practical skills per se. This action research project involved altering the assessment design so that a greater proportion of the marks was allocated to active participation and learning in the laboratory, partially replacing a single examination with direct observation of student participation and learning over a prolonged period of weekly laboratory sessions. We ascertained staff and students’ perceptions of the new assessment processes by means of a Likert scale questionnaire, student focus group and individual staff interviews. Overall, students and staff evaluated the new assessment structure positively, citing fairness, authenticity and reward for effort. Results also revealed the need for specific training of staff in this form of assessment and indicated staff–student ratios made assessment burdensome. Four out of five students reported that an increased awareness of the importance of practical laboratory skills stimulated them to greater efforts to achieve.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02602938.2011.576313

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hunt, L., Koenders, A., & Gynnild, V.
Affiliations
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • Edith Cowan University (AU)
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
Corresponding author
Koenders, Annette
Venue
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
Published
2011-07-04
Volume
37
Issue
7
Pages
861-874
ISSN
  • 0260-2938 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-297X
OpenAlex
W2044456319
Cited by
29
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
  • Australasian Journal of Paramedicine (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet
  • University of Southern Queensland
  • Edith Cowan University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
Keywords
assessment design, molecular biology education, undergraduate laboratory course, laboratory reports, student effort, employee perceptions, student perceptions, assessment fairness, staff-student ratio

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review