\u27Outside their Comfort Zone\u27: Diverse and Engaging Approaches for Students Learning through a Different Discipline

I am an engineer and typically engineering students are assessed using calculation-based exams and written laboratory reports. However, I teach a 5-credit third year module which typically contains 60 architecture students and is compulsory. Simultaneously, these students complete a 20-credit module in studio design involving approximately 30 contact hours per week. The purpose of this module is to provide architecture students with the necessary training in engineering to fulfil requirements at both a professional and accreditation level. Whereas calculation-based exams are commonplace in the assessment of engineering students, using them to assess architecture students does not promote effective learning. It was not uncommon for architecture students to fail the engineering-style exam which suited those with a strong background in maths and physics. They seemed relatively unfamiliar with exams as a form of assessment as most of their submissions are studio portfolios. Exams tend to focus student attention on ‘reproductive thinking’ (Boud and Dochy, 2010). Students often end up cramming last minute, engaging in surface learning rather than the deep learning associated with ‘slow scholarship’ when assessment tasks require substantial involvement over time (Gibbs and Simpson, 2005). An alternative, more inclusive assessment approach was required for this module to improve engagement, to allow equal opportunity to demonstrate learning, to cater for the diversity of students and to reduce the need for individual adaptations for specific students