Assessment and Examination of Student Learning

Assessment as Learning, Confidence and Professional Growth

Assessment is one of the most influential aspects of learning because it shapes how learners engage with content, interpret success, and develop confidence in their abilities. Through my experience teaching adult learners in creative and digital disciplines, I have come to view assessment not simply as a mechanism for measuring achievement, but as a powerful tool for supporting learning, reflection, and professional growth.

My assessment practice is shaped by the context of adult learners undertaking Adobe Certified Professional programmes. These learners often bring different levels of digital literacy, confidence, prior education, professional experience, and personal responsibilities. As a result, assessment must be clear, inclusive, authentic, and closely connected to the skills learners need for certification, employment, further study, and creative practice.

Evidence of a study undertaken for module redesign can be seen in the following link: Understanding Adult Learners in FE.

Over time, my assessment philosophy has moved away from isolated, knowledge-based tasks and towards staged, portfolio-based assessment. This shift reflects my belief that learners demonstrate deeper understanding when they are asked to apply knowledge, explain decisions, respond to feedback, and improve their work through an iterative process. In creative education, the learning process is as important as the final product.

Key Principles of My Assessment Practice

Assessment Redesign: Visual Design Using Adobe Photoshop

A significant development in my assessment practice was the redesign of the Visual Design using Adobe Photoshop module. The original assessment approach presented several challenges, including low engagement, uncertainty around task requirements, and limited confidence among learners. Some students found it difficult to connect the assessment tasks with Adobe certification objectives or with real-world design practice. This created an opportunity to rethink assessment as a more supportive, authentic, and inclusive learning process.

In response, I redesigned the assessment around a staged portfolio process. Rather than focusing only on final outputs, learners were encouraged to document their creative process, develop drafts, engage with feedback, and revise their work. This approach reflects constructive alignment by connecting learning outcomes, activities, assessment criteria, and professional design practice (Biggs and Tang, 2011). It also reflects the principle of backward design, beginning with the intended outcomes and then designing assessment tasks that allow learners to demonstrate those outcomes meaningfully (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005).

Evidence of the course redesign can be seen below:

Course Redesign

What I Learned

This redesign helped me recognise that assessment clarity has a direct impact on learner confidence. When learners understand the purpose of a task, how it connects to professional practice, and how success will be judged, they are more likely to engage meaningfully. I also learned that staged assessment can reduce anxiety because learners receive support before the final submission rather than only after it.

Impact on My Practice

As a result, I now design assessment with process, feedback, and learner autonomy at the centre. I aim to make expectations transparent from the beginning, provide opportunities for formative feedback, and encourage learners to treat assessment as a developmental process rather than a single event.

Evidence of the exam objectives that have been analysed can be seen below.

Exam Objectives for Adobe Certify Professional Visual Design using Adobe Photoshop

The following provides evidence of a module outline aligned with the exam objectives.

Module Outline

Assessment Strategy and Constructive Alignment

In designing the assessment strategy for the Visual Design using Adobe Photoshop module, I aim to ensure constructive alignment between learning outcomes, learning activities, and assessment tasks. The assessment is designed to support progressive development across knowledge, technical skill, creative judgement, and professional confidence.


Constructive alignment is evident in the syllabus presented below.

Syllabus

Applying Bloom's Taxonomy in Curriculum Design

I intentionally incorporated Bloom’s taxonomy, including cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains, to support the development of both technical proficiency and professional competencies required in digital design (Bloom et al., 1956; Krathwohl, Bloom and Masia, 1964). Early activities support remembering, understanding, and practising technical tools. As learners progress, they move towards applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating through design portfolio development.

The affective domain is particularly important in creative education because confidence, motivation, openness to feedback, and willingness to experiment all influence learning. For this reason, assessment activities include peer discussion, collaborative critique, reflection, and revision. These activities help learners develop not only technical competence but also professional attitudes towards design practice.


The following provides evidence of the application of Bloom's Taxonomy across the learning outcomes and related domains.

Learning Outcomes

Grading Rubric Alignment

As part of the curriculum redesign, the grading rubric was revised to strengthen constructive alignment between the learning outcomes, learning activities, assessment tasks, and Adobe Certified Professional (ACP) exam objectives. The rubric was designed to assess not only the final product but also the design process, encouraging learners to demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and competencies required in professional practice.

Each assessment criterion was directly mapped to specific learning outcomes and exam objectives, ensuring that learners were evaluated on the same skills they would encounter in the certification exam. Performance descriptors were structured using Bloom's Taxonomy, progressing from foundational knowledge and understanding to higher-order skills such as analysis, evaluation, and creation. This approach provided clear expectations for learners while supporting the development of critical thinking, problem-solving, and reflective practice.

The revised rubric also enhanced transparency and consistency in assessment by providing explicit performance standards and success criteria. Learners were able to use the rubric as a formative tool throughout the project, enabling self-assessment, peer feedback, and iterative improvement. By aligning assessment criteria with authentic design tasks and professional workflows, the rubric supported both exam preparation and the development of industry-relevant skills.

The following grading rubric demonstrates the alignment between the learning outcomes, assessment criteria, and exam objectives

Grading Rubric

Assessment for, as and of Learning

My assessment strategy integrates assessment for learning, assessment as learning, and assessment of learning. Draft portfolio stages function as assessment for learning because they provide opportunities for formative feedback before final submission. Peer review and reflective activities represent assessment as learning because learners actively engage with criteria and develop the ability to judge quality in their own and others’ work. The final portfolio functions as assessment of learning by demonstrating achievement of module outcomes and readiness for Adobe Certified Professional certification.

This approach reflects my belief that assessment should support development over time. In creative digital education, learners often need opportunities to try, revise, and improve. A single final submission may show achievement, but it does not always reveal the thinking, feedback, and learning that shaped the final work. Staged assessment makes this process visible.

What I Learned

I learned that learners often need explicit support to understand the value of drafts, critique, and revision. Some initially see feedback as correction rather than a learning opportunity. By framing feedback as part of the design process, I help learners understand that professional creative work is iterative and that improvement is evidence of learning.

Feedback and Assessment Literacy

My approach to feedback has evolved to prioritise not only giving feedback, but helping learners understand, interpret, and act on it. I view feedback as a dialogic process that supports learning rather than simply evaluates performance. In the Photoshop module, feedback is provided throughout staged portfolio submissions so learners can improve their work iteratively.

Learners who engage with feedback demonstrate this through revised drafts, reflective comments in Moodle forums, and stronger application of design principles in subsequent submissions. This reflects the principle that feedback should inform future performance rather than only justify grades (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, 2006; Carless and Boud, 2018).

Assessment literacy is supported through early introduction of criteria, exemplars, rubrics, and staged feedback points. Structured peer review activities require learners to engage with the assessment rubric, helping them recognise quality in design work and develop the capacity to evaluate their own progress. This aligns with sustainable assessment, where learners develop judgement they can use beyond the immediate course (Boud, 2000).

Evidence of the staged feedback rubric can be seen below:

Staged feedback rubric

Impact on My Practice

This has changed how I design feedback activities. I now place greater emphasis on helping learners understand what feedback is for, how to use it, and how to apply it in the next version of their work. I also recognise the importance of peer feedback in developing professional judgement, especially in creative disciplines where critique is part of industry practice.

Academic Integrity and Responsible GenAI Use

Recent developments in generative AI have prompted me to articulate my approach to academic integrity more clearly. My stance is not to prohibit AI tools entirely, but to design assessments that promote responsible, transparent, and ethical use while still requiring authentic demonstration of learning.

Learners may use AI tools embedded in Adobe Photoshop and may incorporate legally sourced or AI-generated assets where these are properly credited. However, the design concept, layout, creative development, and reflective explanation must be produced by the learner. To support this, I provide clear guidelines, declaration forms, and reflective checklists that require learners to explain how digital tools were used.

Evidence of GenAI guidance can be seen below:

GenAI use guidance for Visual Design using Adobe Photoshop module

Evidence of academic integrity and GenAI guidance can be seen below:

Academic integrity and GenAI use

Evidence of the academic integrity declaration can be seen below:

Academic integrity and GenAI use document

Equity of access is also important. Some AI tools require paid subscriptions, which may disadvantage learners with limited financial resources. By allowing tools embedded within standard software or freely available resources, I aim to minimise inequity while maintaining fairness.

From a pedagogical perspective, the portfolio-based assessment emphasises higher-order cognitive processes such as analysing, evaluating, and creating, which are less easily replicated through automated tools. By asking learners to document process, reflect on tool use, and explain creative decisions, assessment integrity is designed into the task rather than treated as a separate policing issue.

What I Learned

I learned that academic integrity in the age of GenAI requires clarity, transparency, and assessment redesign. It is not enough to tell learners what they cannot do. They need guidance on ethical practice, attribution, copyright, and how to use emerging tools responsibly while still developing their own skills and judgement.

Alternative and Innovative Assessment

In reviewing the assessment design, I recognised that traditional knowledge-based quizzes could be vulnerable to misuse of generative AI and might not fully capture learners’ creative and technical abilities. To address this, I redesigned the assessment to emphasise portfolio-based, process-oriented tasks that require learners to demonstrate design decisions, workflow, and iterative development.

This shift strengthens authenticity because learners are assessed on how they think, create, revise, and justify their work, not only on the final artefact. It also supports UDL principles by offering flexible pathways for learners to demonstrate understanding through different file formats, reflective documentation, digital portfolios, or Adobe Creative Cloud repositories.

The redesign aligns with guidance on AI-aware assessment by prioritising critical thinking, creativity, reflection, and process. By requiring learners to document decisions and explain their creative journey, the assessment supports higher-order thinking and professional readiness.

Reflection: How Assessment Shapes My Teaching Identity

This work has helped me understand assessment as a central part of my teaching identity. I want learners to leave my courses not only with technical skills, but with confidence, independence, professional judgement, and the ability to continue learning. Assessment can either narrow learning to grades and compliance, or it can open learning into reflection, improvement, and agency. My aim is to design assessment that does the second.

The most important shift in my practice has been moving from assessment as product to assessment as process. In creative education, learners need space to experiment, make mistakes, receive feedback, and refine their work. This mirrors professional design practice and helps learners see themselves not simply as students completing tasks, but as emerging creative practitioners developing judgement and confidence.

Conclusion

My assessment approach reflects a commitment to authentic, inclusive, and future-focused learning. By aligning assessment with industry practice, integrating feedback as a central learning tool, supporting assessment literacy, and responding critically to the challenges and opportunities of GenAI, I aim to create assessment experiences that support both academic achievement and professional readiness.

Moving forward, I will continue to refine this approach by incorporating learner feedback, improving peer review structures, strengthening rubrics, and engaging with emerging scholarship on AI-aware assessment. Ultimately, my goal is to design assessment that helps learners develop not only technical competence, but also confidence, creativity, ethical awareness, and lifelong learning skills.

---

References

---