Oracy in University assessment task

Doherty, C., Kettle, M., May, L., & Caukill, E. (2011). Talking the talk: Oracy demands in first year university assessment tasks. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 27-39. doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2010.498775

Background

There is an increasing interest in communication skills among employers and on university courses preparing students for the workplace. Courses increasingly focus on ‘authentic’ communication activities and, explicitly or implicitly, include oracy within the curriculum or assessment process. There are two approaches to oracy: ‘Oracy for learning’ and ‘oracy as a competence’. These result in different practices.

Aims

The study observed the oracy features of two courses in an Australian university and the criteria used in the assessment of each.

Sample

Two large, first-year, compulsory courses were studied – business (1,000 students) and information technology (360 students). The course assessment for the first consisted of a group project with a written outcome, for the second a group oral presentation.

Method

The first four weeks of lectures and tutorials of each course were video-recorded. The final two tutorials for information technology were also videoed as these focused on oral presentations. Course materials were examined and the course coordinators interviewed.

Findings

On the business course, group preparation for the written report was mainly done outside the course structure and no help on collaborative skills was given. In cases where group communication processes broke down, students were advised to complete the reports individually but were then penalized for a lack of ‘professionalism’, a criterion that included the ability to communicate orally. This was ‘oracy for learning’, i.e. oracy was simply a tool. On the course, there was no attempt to help students with oracy though a lack of the skill could affect results.

Components of the information technology course emphasized communication skills and assessment included group presentations of a project after two tutorials preparing and practising the presentations. The grading was on oral performance rather than content. This course saw ‘oracy as a competence’, which was the focus in the assessment procedures. This may have reduced the authenticity of the assessment task as, in real life, the presentation would be judged more on content.

Implications

The authors believe that, for assessments to be valid, they should closely replicate the real-life activities they represent and thus include both content and oracy skills, and that the students should be properly prepared for both.

Original article retrieved from EBSCOHost.