The only complaint I have about the otherwise inspiring James Atherton post which you cite is that he doesn’t even consider the possibility of assessment for such interesting learning outcomes. My own inclination is to encourage educators to work hard to formulate seriously (not jokingly) learning outcomes in the same spirit as Atherton dismisses jokingly, and the related assessment strategies. Now that would be a really open mind, without the closure and rigidity of supposing that the really valuable things can’t be assessed. Can’t be assessed traditionally, or within a reductionist paradigm, I can well believe. Push the boundaries of assessment, sure. Let us be creative!

I agree with your thoughts on plagiarism. As a tutor I came across very few examples of outright copying-to-cheat, but there were instances of students producing work which was effectively if unintentionally plagiarised. I really don’t think there’s an intention to deceive when students submit work which includes unattributed extracts from text books and papers I’ve recommended they read (or even my own handouts!), and exploring the reasons why that happens and how to overcome it seems to me a much more positive and supportive route than harsh penalties and branding offenders as cheats right from the off. Some institutions allow students to upload their work to Turnitin before it’s formally submitted, so that the student can view, reflect on and act on the plagiarism reports, and that seems like a very beneficial approach.

The observation that ‘much good, innovative practice around assessment is constrained by HEI … policies and regulations’ seems to echo a discussion happening on the ISL list at the moment around modules, semesterisation and learning outcomes as the be all and end all of course planning. This blog post by James Atherton http://www.doceo.co.uk/reflection/2007/02/on-passing-tradition.htm might be ‘unashamedly academic, elitist and reactionary’, but it makes some very pertinent points.