University of Burgos (SPAIN)
About this paper:
Appears in: ICERI2016 Proceedings
Publication year: 2016
Pages: 915-921
ISBN: 978-84-617-5895-1
ISSN: 2340-1095
doi: 10.21125/iceri.2016.1207
Conference name: 9th annual International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation
Dates: 14-16 November, 2016
Location: Seville, Spain
Different strategic have been used by the Universities to adapt their assessment regulations to the requirements of EHEA about the evaluation of skills and competences and the introduction of the continuous assessment. Under the mandatory change of teaching methodology, towards a more proactive and focused on students work methodology, the positions of teachers are influenced by different factors as the type of studies and courses, number of students to evaluate, teaching approach or personal vision. Nor it is foreign to this situation the percentages of success and failure set in degrees, and how their achievement targets, whether as a horizon to reach or an unavoidable obligation.

Different evaluation methods have been suggested to assign a numerical rating to the skills acquired by the student throughout their learning process. A final examination is widely accepted but the range of proposals extends from the elimination of final test using a process of continuous assessment to different degrees or variations of control tests on knowledge and skills and even the division of the subject in eliminatory evaluation test. This is in contrast to a continuous evaluation process and a gradual learning. It has been also removed the “key subjects " and prevails the maxim of "passed material, forgotten matter."

At Burgos University this process has been done by the introduction of different assessment test thought the school year, weighted for the final grade. This evaluation way brings the problem of subject “fragmentation” and also the students lost the overall view of the subject knowledge. The strict academic management, with large groups of students and a very short school year and timetable organization add other difficulties to the problem.

In this work the assessment methods used by six teachers in different subjects and degrees of Industrial Engineering have been compared. Different types of subjects, from core subjects to common and specific ones, in the degree of Industrial Engineering are included for this analysis. The results of the evaluation activities on the final grade have been analyzed. Results in different subjects by the same group of students as well as results in different degrees with the same teacher and subject are compared. A total of nine different subjects, three degrees and five courses results are involved in the study.
Continuous assessment, EHEA, competences, Evaluation, Grade.