Remember when Covid-19 caused a ‘pivot,’ including changes such as shifting examinations online, using technology, increasing time limits, and moving to open-book examinations? This had a perhaps unexpected but incredibly useful impact of increased inclusion for many students, who were able to use familiar equipment in spaces they had adapted to their own needs (Tai et al., 2023). Staff implementation of access requirements and assessment flexibility also increased.

However, as the ‘return to campus’ was orchestrated, previous flexible arrangements that had become the ‘new normal’ were often rescinded. Though assessment changes have been the most likely of Covid-related changes to remain, there is still much that we can do to improve assessment design for inclusion, and the recent pandemic demonstrates just how possible some of these changes are (Broadbent et al 2023). Universities and lecturers need to carefully consider how time, technology, equipment and materials contribute to inclusion or exclusion.

The multiple tensions in assessment

From an institutional perspective, assessment is used to ascertain students have met the appropriate outcomes at the requisite level.  This is important for certification and validation of qualifications. Due to the high-stakes nature of this process for each individual student, it is extremely important that students are not disadvantaged or excluded on the basis of characteristics or abilities that are unrelated to the outcomes being judged.

However, due to assessment task design and implementation, constructs unrelated to the learning outcomes often impact on success – even when accommodations are applied. For instance, in a project on students’ experiences of inclusion in exams, Ellie, who was studying a health professional degree and had dyslexia, recounted one of her experiences:

In this example, there are multiple challenges which the task creates for the student due to her dyslexia, including aspects related to the layout (i.e., small boxes), structure (i.e., jumbled sentences), and foci (i.e., spelling), none of which seem to align with the stated learning outcome, which was the knowledge of medical terminology. In instances like this, assessment should be revisited with a close focus on the learning outcomes. For example, the first two problems Eliza experienced are probably able to be eliminated by changing the task, since neither format is necessary to use. The final one, spelling, is a bit more complicated. Here, staff need to consider if correct spelling is or is not actually a learning outcome. If spelling is an important part of learning and communicating medical terminology, it needs to be stated so students understand it is a requirement and the reasons for this, with appropriate support offered.

Students also prefer assessments that help them connect to their future goals. For example, Eliza noted:

This example illustrates how students might see that more authentic forms of assessment are inclusive of their futures. In these situations, it can also be helpful to consider what types of authentic restrictions or affordances might be available within a workplace or other environment where they might apply their skills (Tai, Ajjawi, et al., 2023).

There is a moral obligation for universities not to act directly or indirectly to disadvantage those enrolled. Beyond this prevention of negative experiences, we might also have positive duties to ensure students are supported in their learning and assessment, in a similar way to how sex discrimination legislation now requires ‘proactive and meaningful action’ from employers to prevent and eliminate sexual harassment, discrimination, and violence (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2024).

Previous justifications for inclusion and fairness of assessment focused on population level outcomes, with abstract ideas of what happens in assessment. Instead, we argue (in alignment with McArthur’s 2018 work on Assessment for Social Justice) that we also need to focus on how students actually experience assessment.

Principled Assessment for inclusion

There are many ways to conceptualise assessment design. Frequently constructive alignment (Biggs, 1999) is invoked as the mainstay of assessment design: this requires learning objectives, learning activities, and assessment tasks to align with each other, and moreover, that students actively participate or engage in the activities in ways that allow them to construct their own learning. This approach suggests that for assessment to be inclusive, it’s not just the end task that matters, but also all the processes and activities that lead up to the task. Students agree with this: in a project exploring diverse students’ perspectives on assessment, Tai, Dollinger and colleagues (2023) found that aspects such as assessment timing, instructions, information, and interactions with staff, as well as broader access to learning resources, were all part of what made assessment inclusive.

Tai, Ajjawi, et al. (2023) offer three design principles which may help to ensure diverse students are not disadvantaged through assessment.

Remember, designing assessment for inclusion doesn’t mean you remove all challenge from the assessment. Rather, the task should be explicitly scaffolded within the course and assessment design, and proactively consider different potential outcomes and formats. To do this, we need to start from the learning objectives and consider the priorities and what is important. This might also involve reconsidering learning objectives to remove extraneous or irrelevant components. For example, if the learning objective is “to write an essay on schools of philosophy”, is the writing of a comparative essay the important capability, or are you more interested in how the student understand the history of philosophy? If both are important, how can you make this clear through your unpacking of criteria?

Then, you might consider assessment design and its subsequent practice by all involved. It might be that there are different ways to think about meeting the objectives (e.g. might students prefer to discuss orally or record a video), some of which might be more appropriate than others in particular contexts. There might also be considerations about what level of pre-existing capability or understanding students have about assessment formats; if nobody knows what a video essay is, then you will need to teach them about this in addition to the content/topic.

Being inclusive is about offering everyone the opportunity to do their best rather than restricting possibilities for high performance to those who already happen to know how to effectively work in specific genres.

Another approach to designing assessment for inclusion

Colleagues at University College Dublin (UCD, 2024) also offer an alternative approach to designing assessment for inclusion. In September 2024, they launched an Assessment for Inclusion Framework designed to ensure equity, fairness and justice for all students. The Assessment for Inclusion Framework is based on 10 Design Principles to maximise the chance of success for all students, and in partnership with those students. These design principles are not intended for every individual assessment task, activity or method, but serve to create an assessment literacy for the development of inclusive assessment practices and policies. As a starting point, think about the diversity of student cohort, the context (discipline, programme, module, etc.) and the stakeholders.

Colleagues at the University College of Dublin, including Sheena Hyland and Geraldine O’Neill, have also developed a framework for assessment for inclusion.

This framework includes a series of ten principles as represented in the diagram above, with a contextual focus to promote outcomes of belonging, values development, and the maintenance of standards for all to succeed.

In their elaboration on the framework, they also highlight three phases of implementation actions:

1. cultivating self-awareness

2. use the Assessment for Inclusion Design Principles: Considering where to start

3. operationalise processes for change

The framework drills deep down into assessment for inclusion design and practice at individual, team, and programmatic levels, and offers a scaffolded and well- linked pathway for developing practice. Below, Associate Professor Geraldine O’Neill introduces the University College Dublin Assessment for Inclusion framework.

References