Abstract:

Introduction:
With the development of further awareness of problematic situations, much needed policies are put into place promising respect for everyone, yet there is a dearth of information out there in terms of how to apply the desirable approaches and find the principles to govern such actions. In light of new regulations around EDII, programs had to be adjusted and assessment had to be readjusted as well. We need to take into account all aspects connected to EDII including personal ways of being and doing and individual learning styles and conduct evaluations accordingly.

Methodology:
This study was empirical in nature as it took into account an instructor’s recorded class assessment strategies and observations. The study took a qualitative approach to enquiry. It consisted of the analysis of observational notes of three university courses during one academic year. It concentrated on assessment in order to uncover steps taken, reactions, adaptations and the overall new directions taken.

Results:
A very flexible assessment plan had been put in place, yet new components had to be developed and a new approach tried. Based on a ‘success for all’ policy advocated by the Ministry of Education, the instructor encouraged students to submit their work ‘in-progress’ for feedback before a final grade was given. However, a final submission deadline had been kept in place which caused a number of difficulties. Observations around this approach will be compared to a new venture in assessment with an approach to feed through to success. As well, grading was held back until students reached an A level if at all possible.
Hurdles identified were situated around measurement of the amount of effort produced, complaints because creativity was a component of the grade, dealing with competitive personalities, lack of tolerance to difference by some students, and the requirement by some students to want to be assessed on a uniform more traditional rubric, like what they were used to in other courses. Assessment assignments also required modifications.
New pathways will be described, including newly designed assignments to enable the desired approach to grading under the new approaches to grading under the new conditions.

Conclusion:
With change implemented around the EDII strategy, many issues surfaced, especially as regards insufficiently flexible mindsets. There was a lack of tolerance for diversity in outcomes, so one has to work on a change of attitude. Students compared group work based on traditional criteria, not the more open parameters the instructor used. Whereas outcomes are important, timely completion of work should also be rewarded.
Some high achieving students resented the additional help provided to others so that they too could achieve high grades. Perhaps it would be best to just assign Pass or Fail, no grades.
Students in these groups were all competing for jobs, those who felt superior wanted to shine and come out above with higher grades, not all students given equal opportunities. They basically need to be reminded that during a job interview grades are not the only aspect considered.
In addition, it appeared that some racialized students, part of visible minorities, were so entrenched in their own side of things, that they were unaware that they also engaged in racialization of others. Therefore, one needs to observe the dynamics in intercultural contexts where white is the minority.

Keywords:

new challenges; personalized grading; readjusting assignments; new trends in Higher education in Canada.