 My name is Katie Lee Bunting and we'll each introduce ourselves when we do our land acknowledgments, but welcome to Can I Submit That? using student assessment to challenge power structures in our learning environments as part of the CTLT Spring Institute. We're really grateful for you all being here. We were chatting before folks came in at saying how many of us are pretty tired at this point in a year and we register for things and then it comes time to participate and then feel a bit maxed out. So thanks for showing up. We appreciate it. So I identify as that abled cis white woman who is of settler ancestry. My ancestors are mostly from Ireland, but also from France. And so in naming that, I acknowledged that my ancestors came here uninvited and reported a colonial project that Canada has founded on. So I am joining from what is now known colonially as Burnaby Heights. And in naming this land, I want to give gratitude and honor the nations of the slave with two Squamish, Salo and Musqueam first nations on whose land I now live on. And we have cared for and been in relationship with these funds for thousands and thousands of years, much longer than the couple generations that my family has been here. And I'm with the department of occupational science, occupational therapy. I'm an assistant professor of teaching there. And I'll pass it over to Judy. Hi, my name is Judy Chan. I am a education consultant with the Center for Teaching, Learning and Technology. I'm also a session lecturer with the Faculty of Learning for Systems. I would like to echo Katie that I am myself a first generation settler here on this land, the shared space between the Musqueam, Coal Salish and the slave, what two nations. And also known as South Vancouver. I'm currently reading this book here, really talking about our responsibility to protect the land. And so a very good book. We can talk about that at a different session. But so I would really continue to think about how I can protect the land because according to the book, when we protect our land, the land will protect us. I'm going to pass on to our student presenters. Lisa, you are right next to me. So maybe Lisa first. Perfect. Thank you, Judy. So hello, my name is Lisa Furzav. And I'm one of, I was in Katie's class last semester, I'm a student of the Masters of Occupational Therapy Program at UBC. And I am currently zooming in from Kukwitlam, which is the traditional unceded and ancestral lands of the Kukwitlam First Nation peoples. I will pass it on to Nicole because she's right underneath me. Hi, everyone. My name is Nicole Banting. I'm very excited to be here today. I'm also a first year Masters of Occupational Therapy student at UBC. And I'm joining from what is colonially known as Victoria. And I'm very grateful and respectfully acknowledged that I'm on the traditional territories of the Songhees, Esquimalt, and Byzantic peoples on whose historical relationships with the land continue today. And I'll pass it off to Parmeet. Hello, my name is Parme. And I'm a student of Occupational Therapy here as well. I took a class as well with Katie Bunting. And I'm sitting here at the city of Suri. And I acknowledge that the land that we're gathering on today, or that I'm on today, is a treaty territory of the Tuas and First Nations and the traditional ancestral and unceded territory of the Coast Salish people, specifically the Quatlan, Katzi, and Semiamal First Nations. Thank you. All right, thanks. Let me invite folks to share what Indigenous land you're joining from and share your land acknowledgement in the chat box if you'd like. OK, so for the sake of time, we'll share our stories of how we got here rather briefly. But I sort of had an awakening moment, the end of the winter term before actually the pandemic started. So if we could remember that far back in, I think that was 2019. And I had taken over a course and it had always, since I'd been participating in it, had sort of these large summative tests at the end that were short answer in person written out. And I was sitting there invigilating and saw these students come into the room that, I really cared about these students and had tried to be intentional in my teaching through the course of being mindful of their well-being and creating relationship. And I see these folks I care about coming in and eyes red-rimmed looking so stressed out and all I could think of and being mindful that I don't have total control over their lives or I'm not the only influence. But just thinking that my decision to have the summative test as the only choice here was harming a lot of these students. And that was a real moment for me to want to do things differently. I don't know if other folks, Judy, Lisa, Palmer, Nicole, want to share anything? I can go ahead. I guess just for me, my background is in sociology. And I've always been interested in occupational therapy. So I had an opportunity to apply and get into the UBC Occupational Therapy Program. So that's where I cost pass with Katie and the other professors that we're working with. And we're actually right now on placement and able to be here today. So it's kind of a little bit about my journey. So similar to Parm, I also have a bachelor's in kinesiology from UBC. And then applied to the master's of occupational therapy program, which I love so far. And that's how I met Katie. And that's how I ended up here. And as Parm said, we are currently on placement on our second placement, which is very exciting, but we are super excited to be here. Yeah, I was very excited for the opportunity and invitation from Katie to participate in this presentation. Coming to the master's of occupational therapy program, just the way that we were evaluated was so different from how I was evaluated in my undergrad. And so I just wanted to share kind of a student perspective on how that's been for me so far. And I'm actually one of the few students who chose to do the summative test, and I kind of wanted to share my thought process around that and maybe provide a different perspective as well. Well, Katie, your questions here just took me all the way back to my undergraduate years, that's many years ago. And I was one of those students who didn't pay attention to the learning objective, but I will madly knock down every single deal day of all the quizzes, assignments, and final exam. And I study according to the exam, according to how I would be evaluated. And that wasn't very useful, that was very stressful. So when Katie, you asked me to join you in this journey, can I submit that? I'm like, yes, let's talk about what we can do as instructor and try to release some of the stress associated with assessment. Thank you, Katie. Great, thanks. Yeah, so that leads us well into our learning objective. So overall, we're looking at how can we support student well-being and really enrich learning experiences through how we design assessments and address power dynamics. So I'm going to pass it over to Lisa to share with you our learning objectives. Yeah, so by the end of this workshop, we will be able to, number one, identify how traditional methods of student assessment can reinforce oppressive power structures in higher education. Number two, critically appraise your own methods of student assessment. And number three, apply an anti-oppressive and relational lens to begin to design more just and equitable methods of student assessment. So then our agenda will closely follow our learning objective. We will go over what is student assessment. We will ask you what is student assessment to you. And Katie is going to introduce to us anti-oppressions and relational teaching and how we can use critical appraisal and critical reflexivity to redesign our assessment strategies. We will then have some time to put these three together in a mix of different type of activities, such as breakout rooms, to look at our student assessment, applying the four concepts, or two of four concepts. And also applying these concepts into our own assessment strategies. And at the end, there will be time for us to share and wrap up. I would also like to know that these ideas about using looking, having a critical lens to look at our assessment strategies, Katie and I, we are not the first people to do this at UBC. We've been inspired by a few people such as Kenneth Rydall from the Food Nutrition and Health Program, Christine Donofio from Art History, Visual Arts and Theory, and also Carol and Knaio, Cellular and Physiological Sciences. They've been using different form of assessment strategies that, that at least for me, I would like to copy them. I would like to use what they're using in the classroom. And recently in the, I was saying the last few months, there's a lot of talk about ungrading. There are like two sessions on ungrading at the Spring Institute. One of them will be back tomorrow morning. And so I would like you to, if we inspire you, so I would invite you to also join those sessions on ungrading. So we are going into, we, like I said, we're going to ask you, what is student assessment? And so what you can do is go into one of your windows or take out your phone and just go to menti.com and use this passcode 4203. Thank you, Katie, for putting it in the chat and 4963. Let us know what you think student assessment is. And this is an open-ended question you can submit multiple times. All right, so we'll hold these ideas of what student assessment is throughout so that to test understanding, evaluate learning, stressful, sort of a query of, is it an evaluation of student learning, bringing in self-evaluation of those students and instructors, that it can be uninspiring, it can be quite contextually constrained. And often student assessment is required to gain marks for, for a course. All right, so next we're going to ask you to share with us what student assessment is not. And again at menti.com enter the code 4203 4963 and that's posted in the chat box. So considerations here around whether or not student assessment actually measures student learning, questioning the objectivity of student assessment and evaluation and grading, naming that it's not a reflection of student's worth, which is messaging that students receive from the point that they enter school, reflecting how much effort a student has actually put in. Yeah, and in ungrading literature there's a lot of critique around that of considering sort of the baseline knowledge that students come into courses with and whether through grading we're actually showing a measurement of how much knowledge students just came in with versus how hard they worked in the course or how much knowledge they gained. Yeah, an evaluation of whether somebody's smart or not and what does it mean to be smart and what sort of epistemologies are valued there. Yeah, and a limiting of student choice and autonomy, unimaginative, uncreative, yeah. So that's maybe actually a good point to pause on here and go back into the rest of our presentation. So thanks for engaging with us in that. And so we're sort of operating on the assumption that folks who have come to this workshop have a pretty good understanding already of some of the pieces we're going to talk to about it. So we'll move through this content somewhat quick in case. So as probably quite a few of you know, and this is something that I started learning more about again, as I mentioned, I had this moment of like, what the heck am I doing in how I assess student learning? So this use of a hundred percent of scale emerged in the early 1900s with letter grades really coming in to being used in the 1940s when K to 12 education became a requirement. And this is the information rooted in the United States, but Canada sort of maps quite closely to what's happening in the States there, education wise. When I'm talking about student assessment, I'm just focusing on grading because really that is the dominant way that we assess students. The idea was that with grading, it would ostensibly sort of facilitate a uniform consistent way of evaluating students across institutions. And we know folks have critiqued that like an A in one institution, we compare it to an A in another institution without really considering contextual factors there. So there's sort of this false valuing that somehow grading is an objective process. And the aims of grading assessment were to sort students into groups. So you all talked about that, like our ranking of students and this notion of identifying you're smart, that it is a measure of your worth. This is the best and then good and pretty good. We have those qualifiers attached to letter grades. It was a way of communicating to students, whether or not they had succeeded in the course. And the idea that through assessment, we can motivate students to learn. And that's sort of what you talked about, Judy, just writing down absolutely everything you needed to know. And I was that kind of student. I did well with traditional grading because I was very driven to prove my worth through getting good grades and motivated to do that. So that's a very quick overall in terms of student assessment and grading and where it came from. So the question is, can we do better? And I think all of us shared our interest in being here with the belief that we can do better. Through your comments on what student assessment is and what it is not, I think that's probably a shared understanding with the folks here. So this is a quote from the pedagogy of the oppressed, Ferry. This quote resonates in terms of why we need to do better with traditional student assessment methods. So in this nutritionist banking approach to education, even when offered under the guise of progressive education, has as its major goal, the fattening of the student's brain for the deposits of the teacher's knowledge. And thus, under this pedagogical model, students absorb understandings not born of their own creative efforts as learners. So it's this critiquing of this banking system of, as an educator, I'm the holder of knowledge. I know what students need to learn best. I can best evaluate that with assessments that I design myself. And the idea is that I'm just stuffing students' brains with knowledge. And through doing that, it can really eliminate the opportunity for students to have agency in their learning and to make creative contributions and to really make deeper connections that matter in the world. So this is kind of that critical pedagogy assertions that anchored some of the changes that we've made and how we evaluate student learning. So we wanted to introduce you all. I do want to preface this by saying I don't view myself as having expertise in anti-oppressive teaching or even relational teaching. You know, I come to this as a learner and it's something that I have engaged in learning around over the last few years. But it certainly aligns with sort of my personal values and my values as an educator and as an occupational therapist. So in anti-oppressive teaching, you know, we're really looking at centering the assertion in education, but the roots of that problem's face or that the challenges that students face aren't residing in isolation within that student as sort of personal feelings about student, but really looking critically at the larger systems that are at play and how those systems are in relation with each other to systematically oppress and marginalize students as a whole really in education and how this is compounded for students through that intersectional lens so that students who experience marginalization elsewhere, this is compounded in the educational settings. So an anti-oppressive paradigm really informs our thinking so that we can question and critique and interrogate these larger sort of hegemonies within education and systems of power that actively marginalize and oppress students. So it's this critical questioning of, you know, what systems are at play here and how do those systems privilege some students, oppress others and overall oppress all students. So really questioning at a systems level why things are happening and how they impact students as opposed to viewing student challenges as personal feelings without a larger critique of the system and making educational choices from that place. The other approach to education, so in addition to anti-oppressive teaching that's connected to critical pedagogy is relational teaching. And this is actually something I came to through Isabel Iqbal at the CTLT as she recommended a work by Harriet Schwartz. And so in relational teaching, it's really centering that educational learner relationship, student-teacher relationship in pedagogy and making educational decisions rooted in relationship. And again, this connects to critical pedagogy because relationality in teaching is typically not something that occurs in educational settings. Typically in educational settings, traditionally it's power over where the educator has power over the student and decisions are made from that power over place. So Schwartz describes this as a practice wherein connection and disconnection with students, power, identity and emotion shape teaching and learning endeavors. And so in relational teaching, we're really looking at centering authenticity, trust, empathy, connection and common humanity in our learning environments and really intentionally centering those as educators in our decisions and how our pedagogical choices and choices around student assessment. And this creates learning spaces where students hopefully feel able to take risks in their learning and assessments and feel like they have choice of agency within these learning environments. And so why does anti-oppression relational teaching matter? It creates space for diverse student perspectives and knowledge and wisdom which enriches experiences of mattering in classroom spaces and enriches and deepens student learning experiences. And we have folks have been pushing for greater diversity in student bodies admitted to higher education institutions like UBC. But if we're creating, if we're welcoming students with diverse lived experiences and students with diverse identities that have historically been marginalized from places like UBC and then we're not changing the way that we educate in those spaces, then we are just continuing to oppress and marginalize. So through anti-oppression and relational teaching, we create spaces where students are celebrated for their lived experience or acknowledged for the knowledge and diverse sort of knowings that they bring to this space. And so this fosters collaborative educational spaces between educator and students. And it is through relationship that students are motivated to learn and engage in their learning as opposed to through a striving toward getting a particular grade. And culturally and ideologically and socially relevant curricula, as I mentioned, are more effective in enabling academic development across all students. So it allows for a learning environment that celebrates all that students can bring. The other piece that we wanted to bring in here are the tools of critical appraisal and critical reflexivity. So critical appraisal is really questioning, reflecting, thinking, contesting, and evaluation of assertions made and to appraise the broader contextual factors that have formed these assertions. So critical appraisal of our educational systems is asking these broader questions of, you know, who benefits, you know, why are we doing this? Who designed these? Why did they design these? What ideologies are present? How do they impact students? Why? So it's a consistent questioning of these larger systems at play and these larger contextual factors. And then critically, a critical reflexivity is unpacking our own positionality as educators. You know, so for myself in the learning environments, my critical reflexivity is constantly thinking about, you know, for myself as a cisgendered white woman of settler background who's abled, who did well and succeeded in traditional educational settings throughout upper middle class. I am not a first gen student. How does my positionality affect how I come into these learning spaces? How does my positionality affect how the decisions I make as an educator? And so it's really finding strategies to question our own attitudes and thought processes, our values, our assumptions and prejudices, our habitual actions as educators to become more aware of, you know, how might we be limiting the processes and helping this critical reflexivity actually allow for more laboratory practices in education. And so our approach in redesigning these student assessments was to bring our approaches of, are these approaches of relational teaching, so centering relationship and humanity, an anti-oppressive approach, so interrogating and problematizing systems of oppression in higher education and how those show up in our learning environments. And then using a critical appraisal as a tool, so active questioning of contextual factors, shaping student assessments, and then always being engaged in critical reflexivity. So that critical knowing our own positionality and how that impacts our decisions in the classroom. So we know that we're moving through this at a rather quick pace. I see that there's been some conversation in the chat box. Thanks for keeping up with it, Judy. If folks are okay, we're going to move on to sharing some examples of educator and student perspectives of our experience of enacting this in OSOT 511, which is a first year, first term course in the master's of occupational therapy program that explores the sort of foundations of occupational therapy knowledge and conceptual models and practice process. So I'm going to introduce this. I feel like I've been talking a lot. And then I will gladly pass this over to Parm and Lisa and Nicole to share a bit about their experience of engaging in this. So this is a change made in OSOT 511, which again is in the master's of occupational therapy program. So students come into the program with an undergraduate degree and various life experience. And it's a two year, a 24 month entry to practice master's program. So historically in this course, as I mentioned, there was a summative in person open ended question exam that was usually three hours. Students would have three hours to complete it. So this year we offered the choice of a critical creative project or a summative test. And when Lisa and Parm share their experience of the critical creative project, I'll pass it over to them to explain what they did and what that looked like. 43 out of 64 students chose the critical creative project. 21 students chose this summative test which was moved online and made open book and also open over the course of, I think two days, Nicole, you can remind me where students could choose when they wanted to log in to write the test. Across both evaluations, the average, which I know was a bit of a crude measurement, was 87%. So that was consistent across both just by chance. So I'll pass it over to Parm and Lisa to share their experience and I'll stop sharing my screen so that you can see their faces more. I'll also be sharing some other examples in the chat box that we got consent from students to share with you. And the critical creative projects are what Lisa and Parm chose and then Nicole's going to share about her experience with the summative test. Okay, for me, the ability to be able to control my own way of learning, it really allowed me to have a better fit for my personal needs and allowed me to demonstrate my learnings in a way that was for my strength. I think a key component in occupational therapy and healthcare is understanding how your patient or client is on that day. So if they're down or if they have something, we don't really do full assessments on that day. For me, having the opportunity to choose which assessment works and for me, that was really helpful in the ability to showcase what my actual knowledge was rather than coming in on one day and writing a full exam and being done with it. So I think that was what was important and being able to actually get out the information from my head and think about it throughout the course and demonstrate it in a non-traditional way, which is really helpful for me. So that's kind of the approach I took with the way that I did it and developing the artifact. And I think Katie is going to be sharing our PDF that we created. So Lisa and I were actually partners for this particular assessment, which is great. Yeah, kind of adding on to what Parma is saying. Personally, I've never been a student that that particular tests well. I was never really a fan of the traditional testing methods. I avoided them as much as I could. Of course, I still had to do what I had to do. Had to work very hard to do well on them. And I still, I am where I am for that reason, but I was particularly never a fan of them. Kind of hated them. So I had my own feeling towards that. And when Katie presented this option to us, I thought it was such a unique opportunity because it allowed us, both the Parma and I, to determine the things that we are currently struggling with and almost problem solve together to kind of solve something that wasn't working for us at the moment. We got to work together, solve those issues we were having. And as a result, we were also able to utilize our strengths and create something that we are proud of today. And with this specific project, we still use it today, even throughout our placements, even throughout practice, and we refer to it often. But I think having that opportunity to showcase our strengths and be able to show her that we can showcase our understandings, I think that made all the difference for us. And as future occupational therapists, I think it's important to be able to have a choice in something. And whether that be Parm, Nicole, or I, we could be exposed to the similar situation, but we may not have or choose the same assessment. So I think that kind of translates here as well. We had the same assignment presented to us, but we all didn't choose the same thing. So I think that's really important here and it can definitely apply to our futures. Thanks for sharing, Lisa and Parm. For myself, I did my undergrad in science, and a lot of my exams were very traditional. I was very much multiple choice exams, memorizing all the facts. And then when I came into the Masters of Occupational Therapy Program and took Katie's course, I was very surprised and really appreciative of the fact that we did have a choice in the type of assessment that we'd have at the end of our course. So again, I was one of the few students who chose to do the summative exam. And that was basically based on receiving the rubric, the learning objectives, sample questions, as well as the instructions for the other option. And so for me, I really took the time to kind of reflect on both of the methods of assessment, reflect on what learning style applied best for me. And as someone who really likes to write all my answers and reflect and am more so of a traditional learner in that sense, I really reflected on the fact that that traditional assessment was what fit best with my learning style. And I know that other students, they have different learning styles than myself, but I think at the end of the day, having that informed choice and that agency to kind of direct my own learning was very helpful for me. And that's kind of why I decided to go with the summative exam. All right, great. Thanks, everyone. So I will share our slides again. And Judy is going to walk us through an assignment that she is going to critique from this sort of four-pronged approach for us. I also wanted to share that in the chat box in case folks don't have it opened, I shared other examples of student work for the critical creative project. And then I also shared the outline of the this option for the assignment. All right, Judy, I'll pass it over to you. Thank you, Katie. Thank you for Katie. Katie, as you were talking through the end to oppressions and everything, it really made me think about my own practice again. So I am not really following my script much. I just really want to think about my course and think about the situation. When you talk about anti-oppression, we were talking and there was a little side chat with Michelle. It's a little small chat with Michelle. The anti-oppression is about the system. And for my course, one of the biggest system is an introduction course. But we welcome a lot of students. We welcome students from all over campus. The way I say welcome is actually my own reframing of the framework. Students are required. Some of the students are required to take my course. These are students in the new food nutrition and health program in the faculty of Nenon's food system. But 90% of my students are actually coming from outside of the faculty. And they are taking the course for many different reasons. One of them is for my students who is from art, they are taking it because it's a required science course. It will fulfill their science credit. So they walk into my classroom, they scare. Many of my students, some of my students love science and they love history or anthropology, but they chose to be a major in art. But many of my students haven't had any science since grade 10. And this is the last course that they need to do. They've been postponing taking a science course. This is the last course they need to take to graduate. So they haven't had any science for seven, eight years. And they're scared. They walk into my classroom being very scared, not knowing what science means to them and how they can survive through the course. So I think that's one of the systematic pressure that some of my students have. Some of my students are also taking the course because it's also under credit. So they assign students and they are supposed to take some course that is outside of science and outside of art. And therefore this course in the Faculty of Lemons for System is sort of perfect as a good fit. So I do have students who are taking the course for very different reasons. I also teach in the summer. So I also have students who is working full-time, traveling around the world, practicing in the teams and doing all sorts of things. So I'm really thinking about my students. So we don't have a lot of time. So I really think about what is affecting my own and tone when I teach, who I am. I share with my student who I am, my own upbringing, my science education, how I spend eight years of my life looking at a protein, the chemical structure of a protein and how that protein now affect the bigger role of food consumption. And then in my course I also develop a loop and not only that I share, I also want my students to share, to build that relationship with each other. What they want to learn, why they're taking this course, and I also really want them to learn about who else is in the classroom. What are our common goals and some of our common challenge? So I build a lot of activities around that. So it will help us do the assessment later. And one of the assessments that is more related to assessment is that I do not have real debt loin in my course. I tell them that we all live in a systems as an instructor. It's my responsibility to submit the grade to the bigger system. And therefore there's no real debt line. Please give me a few days to do all the grading and all the marking. So the real debt line, I do have suggested guidelines that guide that line for all my assignments. But I tell them that if you cannot submit your work, it's okay. And throughout the six weeks, my students get to understand that when Julie says it's okay to submit something late, she really meant it because they've tried, they've asked me, they repeatedly asked me many times, is that okay? And I said yes. So I just want to focus on some of my practice in assessment. So Katie, I know we are running out of time. So I pass it back to you. That's okay. I think it would be nice, Judy, to go through just the process that you took in terms of critiquing this one's student assessment. And then we'll see it mine and then we'll go into the break-up in hours. So very, very quick. So we have a lot of questions here. And maybe just go to the next slide, Katie, because I put in a little bit of my response to that. So to save us some time. Yeah. And we'll have these questions available to folks when you do your own work too. Yes. So like I said, where are we now? So my students have just really going to focus on the end of the term research paper. Lots of students, we only have six weeks. So there's really very little time for us to be a relationship, for me to be a relationship with the students and for the students in the team to work together because it's a team-based project too. And many of students are coming from outside of the faculty and therefore they really bring with them lots of different expertise that we don't have for each other, for each other. So celebrating that range of strange in my students. So looking at the next slide. So these are some questions that we ask ourselves. So why do I do this assessment? Who decides? Of course. I am the instructor. I decide the assessment. I give them some guidelines on what they should be doing for this end of the term project. Yes. Of course I think when I develop my assessment it aligns with my learning outcome. Yes. Of course. Yes. This my course is my learning outcome and my assessment aligns with it. But what is really missing? For me, the end of term research paper is very science seeds. Well, it's a science course. It's actually missing a little bit of life. It doesn't really align. It's a course on food. And I feel that this is our relation with the food. Our everyday eating of the food is missing. We talk about science and the chemical structures and safety and microbiology. But it's missing that connections to our everyday life that is missing. So when I develop this research project and it's a team-based, I forgot to put it here, who is going to be who is going to be advantage? It will be the science students because I have a lot of thought of my students are actually coming from the faculty of science. And because it's a team project, I think in our traditional grading system, we often talk about are you a leader? Are you leading the group? Are you sharing your ideas? We really favor the outgoing students, the students who are really more willing to share. The students who are going to speak louder and faster and earlier. So I think there's something in my traditional grading that favor those students. Are the students really part of the assessment? Not really in the beginning, no. But I started to give them more control or power. I give them lots of control of what they are going to work on the paper and also the format. So again, I still need to give them some guidelines because I don't have that time to build a relationship. I don't have the time to share what, to give them everything, all the options because they would get really lost. I still feel that I need to give them some framework. These are some suggestions. This is what you can do and you have the freedom to choose. In the traditional assessment, I also don't, they don't have a lot of role in their education. So what I have done then is that based on the results of the term project, they actually contribute to my final exams. So there's a small part. I don't have the time to go into the next slide, but I will just say it here. There's a small part that they will suggest some exam questions for the final exam. And I will then ask students in the whole class to study those final exam questions. These are final exam questions that come from the project and the student design it and students need to study each other's questions. It's not a lot. I don't want them to read the whole project. It could be too much, but really focusing on some of the questions contributed by the students. Yes, the worth, the value is all measured by grade in the past, but in what I've done is I've also included a lot of process work. Submit your reflection, submit your learning goal, submit, tell me how you're going to work in a team. And as long as they are doing the work, they are going to be rewarded by a great. I will recognize the contribution and trying by giving them a grade. So I'm trying to take some of these, some of my power in this course, in this assignment and give it back to them and also find ways to reward them and recognize the strength. So I will stop here, Katie. I think the next slide has more. It's too much, yes. Okay, and we will be sharing our slides. We're sorry that we didn't send them out ahead of time. So what we'd like is for you all to have a chance and time to apply this approach. So we've sort of designed this in two steps. One for an opportunity for you to do some thinking around it and then one for you to do some application of it. So we'd like to hand it over to you. And again, thanks for your grace with us moving through this in a fairly quick pace. I will pause if anybody has any questions in regards to the approach that we've outlined. If anything is not clear to folks, then we will have time at the end for discussion and more questioning around our experiences. Okay, so I think in one of my broadcast messages, I said, time is oppressive and it is. And so again, we appreciate how much we are asking of you all to pack into a relatively short period of time. Really the aim, our aim was that you could begin to maybe have a bit of a framework to start thinking through redesigning of some assessments. So we have about 10 minutes left. We do have some takeaways that Lisa and Nicole and Parm will be sharing with you. We also want to make sure we have time for that. So we have about four minutes for discussion. But if anybody wanted to share sort of maybe something interesting that came up in your breakout rooms, if you had any sort of aha moments or anything that's still sort of sticky that you're, you know, you feel a bit stuck on. Sunayna, I see your hands up. Yeah, thank you. I think one ongoing challenge that was evident in our last breakout room is our limit, the limitations we face around class size and TA hours. Because many of the creative teaching practices require that we have capacity to grade more than we currently do. And I wonder if you have any suggestions as to how we might consider anti oppressive teaching in classes of 200 where we might have 12 hours a week of TA support. Yeah, that was the discussion we were having as well is the reality that we are working in these higher ed systems that don't center the student agency and that don't center relationship. They're really rooted in capitalism. And so, you know, we have to work within those systems. And, you know, we know that over the last 30 years education has consistently been funded. So there is a session on ungrading tomorrow that we would recommend you all go to. Is it tomorrow, Judy? Yes, tomorrow. And I guess the other... Sorry, just one more thing really quickly. I don't teach in 200 student classroom spaces. I teach, I will be teaching with 72 students. But I would also say, like viewing this on a spectrum so that it's not all or nothing. And like, you know, there are small ways to bring in, you know, relational anti oppressive pieces into your teaching that can be done, that can be scaled up. A very small example, this is outside of student assessment, but we use, we have classroom playlists that students contribute to. And so we play music at the beginning of classes and at breaks and these are playlists that students have contributed to. And the idea with that is that students in the learning environments can see themselves there. You know, they hear their own music. And even that in and of itself sort of disrupts the typical sort of power structures in the classroom. Judy? I teach in my course as about 100 students. And so earlier on, I mentioned that in my term project, I have a lot of little process steps. Submit your reflection, submit your team contract, submit your outline, submit your plan. And to me, knowing where they are in the planning process and what they're thinking and how they agree or disagree to work together. And basically, as long as they submit something, I basically just give them the full mark of that piece. So the marking becomes quite easy. It's not as laborious. And I also find myself enjoying those small grading. So I often tell my students, if the term paper is worth 20%, by going through the process, they already earn 12%. So in a way, it's a grading practice. It just takes some of the time pressure off. When I do that, because again, it's a six-week course. We don't have the time. And I don't have enough TAs. So it's the guiding them through the process and why that's important. You build relationship, you plan, you do some research, you write something up, and then you demonstrate the learning. So that's my way of handling that time pressure. But I really want to give some space for Nicole, Lisa, and Pam to share. One of my key takeaways from having the option to do either the summative assignment or the more creative type of assessment was just that every student learns differently. Like I know that I know myself best and I know how I learn best and how I learn best is through a more, maybe more traditional assessment versus how Lisa and Parm are. They really jump at the opportunity to do a more creative type of assessment. And I just really appreciate having the choice and the agency to direct my own learning. And as someone who is going into a health care profession, it's also a helpful role model for myself, knowing that I want to give my own clients the choice to direct their own treatment as well. And so it was just a really great opportunity for me to reflect on that. And I just really appreciated having that choice in my learning. So having the opportunity to direct our own learning has allowed me to find solutions to concepts I was having trouble wrapping my head around. I found that this experience overall helped me gain essential problem-solving skills that I can apply to my future as an occupational therapist. And overall having a choice in assessment created a space and a safe space to showcase my confidence and confidence as a student. And after talking to Judy and Katie throughout this planning process for this workshop, I did not realize that I was under the assumption that professors go through the university to set a curriculum for the course. But in fact, they have a choice in how they want things to look as well. And something that I'll probably continue to wonder is since professors have a choice in their course curriculum and what they want in their assessments, I wonder what they want to see from their students. Do they want students to showcase their strengths and their learning? Or how does that look like for them? Sorry, and I think for me, the ability to have the opportunity to choose and being able to control what I know and expressing that to instructors, I think that's what was important in my key takeaway is by giving the option to have a choice. It's more of a dynamic relationship and also mitigates some of the power dynamic where I feel like I am in control of my learning. So that's what was really helpful in my key takeaway here. Your dog is really excited there, Parm 2. All right, so we've got two minutes left. We just want to extend our gratitude for all of you for participating today and being here with us. Like we said, to have compassion and grace towards oneself when you're wanting to do this work, it can be challenging and that's sort of by design. So, and knowing that every little change does add up, not to sound too rose-colored glasses, but it's finding community and making changes where you can and really staying grounded in those values and believing in what you're doing. So, and I wanted to especially give thanks to Judy, who I initially approached a year ago about redesigning this summative evaluation of this idea and her support and for doing this session with me today and especially in the Coldies and Parm. You all are such busy, busy student occupational therapists, you're on placement and so we're so grateful that you took the time out of your busy day to come and support others learning around this. So thank you everybody very much.