Students in Year Two of the Foundation Degree in Learning and Teaching at the University of Northampton, study a module relating to special educational needs/inclusion. Assessment is through a collaborative group project and a personal project diary and reflective statement. Student evaluation feedback from 2006/7 identified a significant level of concern relating to group members acting as ‘passengers’ during the project. Initial analysis of this prompted a need to explore whether the assessment strategy was sufficiently non-discriminatory in producing a module grade which fairly represented the achievement of individuals. Some students who had not fully contributed achieved the same high grade for the module as those members who strongly engaged with the work. In addition to this equitability issue the Course Team reviewed tutor direction and input and found taught time was in excess of the allocated 24 hours for the module. Tutor guidance was identified as a major contributor to high student achievement but there was a concern that this high input could further exacerbate some students' non-engagement as they were being led rather than being empowered to develop their own projects. Both student and Course Team concerns formed the basis of a full module review in June 2007. As a result of the June 2007 review the assessment weightings were amended to 60% for the group assessed project and 40% for the individual elements; they had previously been 80%/20%. In order to further reduce student fears over equitability and assist them in effecting improved group self-management, a longitudinal research project has been established to discover if the weightings review has any positive affect on the inter-personal dynamics within the groups. One respondent group is tracked to determine the level of group self-management in creating an ethos of equitable working within the new weightings framework. Research focus is upon examining how the group: • formed and decided upon their project focus • maintained communication • managed inter-personal professional working relationships • managed the equitable sharing of the work-load. It was felt that to reduce the current high level of Tutor input would create further inequalities (non-consistency with previous student cohorts and with current cohorts in the present year group). Data for analysis will be acquired from selected students by asking them to comment on the level, and nature, of Tutor input in their final individual reflective statements. Reporting, and reflecting upon, the ‘student voice’ is the underpinning theme of this module review. This data will be compared to individual student reflective commentary from the 2006/7 cohort.

Analysis of individual personal reflective diaries/statements (selected from the full range of students) Semi-formal interviews with a selected respondent group of students Narrative observations (of student collaborative group working) with functional analysis

From this evaluation it is expected that the amendments to the assessment weightings and, in a more subtle way, an awareness of the level of Tutor input will have made a positive impact on: •Group dynamics by enabling an effective communications system within the group leading to an equitable self-managed ethos relating to task sharing and • Greater empowerment and ownership of the project by the group members The field research will be completed by April 2008