Eksamener på universiteterne bør gentænkes

Forfattere

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7146/dut.v20i39.153260

Resumé

Artiklen argumenterer for en gentænkning af eksamenssystemet for videregående uddannelser. Eksamen bør ikke udelukkende betragtes som redskab til at vurdere, om de studerende opfylder målbeskrivelsen; eksamen spiller også en rolle i den samlede læreproces. Bedømmelsen af de studerendes præstationer er en proces, hvor intentionen er, at de studerende motiveres til at engagere sig kritisk med fagligt materiale og tilegner sig færdigheder og kompetencer. Bedømmelsesprocesser fungerer derved både som spejl og kompas i undervisningen, idet de reflekterer det fagligt niveau og guider den akademiske dannelse.

Teknologiske fremskridt, fx GAI, og et dynamisk arbejdsmarked skaber et presserende behov for at gentænke eksamenssystemet. Uden en tilpasning risikerer det eksisterende system at svigte udviklingen af relevante kompetencer til fremtiden.

Artiklen foreslår en differentieret eksamenstilgang, der rækker ud over variation i prøveformater, men som integrerer bedømmelse for og som læring. Tilgangen fremmer faglig og personlig udvikling og styrker sammenhæng mellem bedømmelsesproces og læreproces.

Forfatterbiografi

Peter Josef Wick, TEACH, Københavns Universitet

Pædagogisk Center Samfundsvidenskab

Specialkonsulent

Referencer

ChatGPT 4.0 er blevet anvendt til at forbedre artiklens sprog og læsevenlighed.

Adams, R. J., et al. AERA, APA, & NCME (2014). The Standards for educational and psycho-logical testing (AER Association, AP Association, & NC o. M. i. Education Eds.). Washington: American Educational Research Association.

Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Boud, D., Bennett, S., Hall, M., & Molloy, E. (2016). Support for assessment practice: developing the Assessment Design Decisions Framework. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(5), 545-556. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1160217

Bearman, M, Ajjawi, R,Boud, D., Tai, J & Dawson, P (2023). CRADLE Suggests... Assessment and genAI. figshare. Online resource. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22494178.v1

Bell, A.R. & Brooks, C. (2018). What makes students satisfied? A discussion and analysis of the UK's national student survey, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 42:8, 1118-1142, https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1349886

Bjælde, O. E., Boud, D., & Lindberg, A. B. (2023). Designing feedback activities to help low-performing students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14697874231212820.

https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874231212820

Bjælde, O. E. & Lindberg A. B. (2021). "DUT Guide om løbende bedømmelse". Dansk universitetspædagogisk tidsskrift,16(31), s. 79-93. https://doi.org/10.7146/dut.v16i31.128036

Bjælde, O.E., Jørgensen, T. H., & Lindberg, A. B. (2017). Continuous assessment in higher education in Denmark. Dansk universitetspædagogisk tidsskrift, 12(23), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.7146/dut.v12i23.25634

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86 (1), 8-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170408600105

Boud, D., Ajjawi, R., Dawson, P., & Tai, J. (2018). Developing Evaluative Judgement in Higher Education. Assessment for Knowing and Producing Quality Work. Routledge https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315109251

Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in University Assessment. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315740621

Carless, D, et al. (2017). Scaling up Assessment for Learning in Higher Education. 1st ed., vol. 5, Springer Singapore Pte. Limited, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3045-1

Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Dollinger, M. & Boud, D. (2024): Validity matters more than cheating, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2386662

Dyhrberg O'Neill, L. (2024). Assessment of student debates in support of active learning? Students' perceptions of a debate-based oral final exam. Active Learning in Higher Education, https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874241245665

French, S., Dickerson, A. & Mulder, R.A. (2023). A review of the benefits and drawbacks of high-stakes final examinations in higher education. Higher Education 88, 893-918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01148-z

Hattie, J. (2015). The applicability of Visible Learning to higher education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 79-91 https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000021

HEA (Higher Education Academy, UK) (2012). A Marked Improvement: Transforming Assessment in Higher Education.

https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets.creode.advancehe-document-manager/documents/hea/private/resources/a_marked_improvement_1568037044.pdf

Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In R. L Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 17-64). ACE/Praeger

Mazon, M. (2017). Forsker: Dødhamrende god idé at droppe karakterer. Djøfbladet, 11.10.2017. https://www.djoefbladet.dk/artikler/2017/10/doedhamrende-god-ide-at-droppe-karakterer

McArthur, J. (2023). "Rethinking Authentic Assessment: Work, Well-Being, and Society." Higher Education, vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 85-101, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00822-y

Messick, S. Linn RL. (1989). Validity. Educational measurement 1989 3rd ed New York Macmillan 13-103

Mezirow, J. (1991): Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey Bass

Klein Degerbøl, S., Blohm Graversen, T., Lyngby Von Müllen, R. & Wick, P.J. (2025): Aktiv læring. Teach. Københavns Universitet. https://researchprofiles.ku.dk/da/publications/aktiv-læring

Københavns Universitets nye principper for anvendelsen af GAI (gældende fra efterår 2025) - kan rekvireres

Københavns universitet, Eksamenskatalog Samfundsvidenskabelige Fakultet: (Intranet, 13. feb. 2025). Kan rekvireres.

Lodge, J.M., Howard, S., Bearman, M., Dawson, P & Associates (2023). Assessment reform for the age of Artificial Intelligence. Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency

OpenAI. (2025). ChatGPT 4.0 [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.

Piwek,P. & Savage, S. (2022). Student co-design of confidence-building formative assessment for Level 1 Computing and IT-students. eSTEeM project final report. https://university.open.ac.uk/scholarship-and-innovation/esteem/sites/www.open.ac.uk.scholarship-and-innovation.esteem/files/resources/Paul%20Piwek%20and%20Simon%20Savage,%20Student%20co-design.%20eSTEeM%20Final%20Report.pdf

Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education, 2. udgave. London: Routledge/Falmer

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203507711

Rienecker, L., Troelsen, R. (2023). Universitetspædagogik i oversigt - Begreber og metoder. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur

Rundle, K, Curtis, G. & Clare, J. (2020): Why students choose not to cheat. In Bretag, E. (ed.) (2020): A research Agenda for Academic Integrity. Edward Elga. Bem,. The model is on page 102 and is called: A modified routine activity theory model of the causes of, and barriers preventing plagiarism and contract cheating.

https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789903775.00014

Sadler, R. in Blömeke, S.,Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., Kuhn, C. & Fege, J. (0213): Modeling and Measuring Competencies in Higher Education. Rotterdam: SensePublishers, s.13-27

Tai, J., Ajjawi, R.; Boud, D.; Dawson, P. and Panadero E. (2018). "Developing Evaluative Judgement: Enabling Students to Make Decisions about the Quality of Work." Higher Education 76 (3): https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3

Trotter, E. (2006) Student perceptions of continuous summative assessment, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31:5, 505-521, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600679506

Van der Vleuten, C. P., Schuwirth, L., Driessen, E., Dijkstra, J., Tigelaar, D., Baartman, L., & van Tartwijk, J. (2012). A model for programmatic assessment fit for purpose. Medical Teacher, 34(3), 205-214. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.652239

Villarroel, V., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D., Bruna C. & Herrera-Seda, C. (2018). Authentic assessment: creating a blueprint for course design, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43:5, 840-854, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1412396

Villarroel, V., Boud, D., Bloxham, S., Bruna, D. & Bruna, C. (2020) Using principles of authentic assessment to redesign written examinations and tests, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57:1, 38-49, https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1564882

Wick,P., Portefée Hjortsø, C., Milkovic Rasmussen, R. Berg, P. (2016): Bedømmelse og evaluering i innovations- og entreprenørskabsundervisning på de danske universiteter. Fonden for Entreprenørskab. https://ffefonden.dk/fonden-som-videncenter/vidensamling2/bedommelse-og-evaluering-i-innovations-og-entreprenorskabsundervisning-pa-de-danske-universiteter/

Winstone, N. & Carless, D. (2020). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education. A learning-focused approach. Routledge: Abingdon. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351115940

Yan, Z. & Boud, D. (2021). Conceptualising assessment as learning (p. 6). In Yan, Z. & Yang, L. (Eds.), Assessment as learning: Maximising opportunities for student learning and achievement. New York: Routledge https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003052081-2

Aarhus Universitet: "Prøveformer på AU": https://kvalitet.au.dk/aarhus-universitet/studieordninger-paa-au/centrale-elementer-i-en-studieordning/proeveform

Downloads

Publiceret

2025-12-18

Citation/Eksport

Wick, P. J., & Büchert Lindberg, A. (2025). Eksamener på universiteterne bør gentænkes. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 20(39). https://doi.org/10.7146/dut.v20i39.153260