Continuous Assessment in Civil Engineering Education
Yes, but with Some Conditions
F. J. Martín-Carrasco, A. Granados, D. Santillán and L. Mediero
Department of Hydraulic and Energy Engineering, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM), Madrid, Spain
Keywords: Continuous Assessment, Computer Tests, Final Grades, Higher Education, Technological Subject, Students'
Learning.
Abstract: Adapting Spanish curricula to the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) implies the introduction of
continuous assessment. Continuous assessment is generally considered to enhance students' learning. The
new methodology contrasts with the traditional Spanish method of assessment, based only on exams. This
paper compares the student’s learning under these assessment methods in Civil Engineering (Civ.Eng.). The
results of 16 consecutive years of assessment of a technological subject (Hydraulic Engineering) have been
analysed. Assessment during the first 8 years was performed only by final exams; and onwards by
classroom exercises, computer tests in a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) and final exams. Rates of
students that passed are clearly higher in this latter period, what seems to support that a better learning is
achieved under continuous assessment. However, when analyzed in detail, it is found that exams scores are
significantly lower during the continuous evaluation period. Sometimes the appearance of a higher grade
may mask a lower level of learning. The reasons lie in the psychology of the students, since they reduce
their effort once a satisfactory score is achieved in the periodical training. The paper examines what
elements should be incorporated to continuous assessment to improve student's learning.
1 INTRODUCTION
In the convergence of the Spanish curricula to the
European Higher Education Area (EHEA), the
assessment methodologies have entered in a new
framework, in which the development of skills and
assimilation of contents is assessed continuously,
giving feedback to students during the learning
period. This change in the assessment methods has
been fostered by the development and spread of new
tools as the Virtual Learning Environments (VLE),
which opened many possibilities for transmitting
information and interacting with the students.
In this framework, continuous assessment has
been adopted by Spanish universities, which assume
that assessing students throughout the course with
periodic tests and courseworks will enhance their
assimilation of knowledge and development of skills
(Delgado, 2005; Hernández, 2012).
Civil Engineering is imbibed in this change
period. Current Civil Engineering Degree, which
nowadays concedes the capacity to fully develop the
professional activity, is being substituted by a
Bacherlor’s Degree (B.Sc., 4 years long, that
conceded limited professional qualifications) plus a
Master of Science (M.Sc., 2 years long) (MCIN,
2009a; MCIN, 2009b). In most Spanish universities,
the B.Sc. is being implemented, while the M.Sc. is
under preparation. Besides, the current Civil
Engineering Degree is being in extinction process,
which is done coordinately with the introduction of
the new titles.
The implementation of the new M.Sc. is the next
step towards harmonizing the titles to the EHEA.
For instance, at the Universidad Politécnica de
Madrid (UPM), it will be introduced the next
academic year 2014-2015. Therefore is necessary to
design the subject’s assessment methodology.
Within the abovementioned extinction process, some
technological subjects of the Civil Engineering
Degree have been applying a continuous assessment
methodology on recent years, in order to better adapt
to the new EHEA requirements. The analysis of this
experience may be useful for identifying weaknesses
of the continuous assessment when applied to
technological subjects, which is the objective of this
work.
Continuous assessment provides certain
103
J. Martín-Carrasco F., Granados A., Santillan D. and Mediero L..
Continuous Assessment in Civil Engineering Education - Yes, but with Some Conditions.
DOI: 10.5220/0004797401030109
In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU-2014), pages 103-109
ISBN: 978-989-758-021-5
Copyright
c
 2014 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

advantages over other methods (García-Beltrán,
2002; Trotter, 2006; Isaksson, 2007; Joughin, 2009).
The method enables the students to gradually
assimilate knowledge and progressively develop
their skills. Furthermore, the method provides
information about the learning process. Students and
teachers may be interested in this information which
provides a feedback on the learning process.
Moreover, the method is a student-centered learning
system which offers a better preparation towards the
final exam, as it may be similar to the exercises
solved by the students in the periodic tests and
courseworks.
Contrary to the previous advantages, several
drawbacks have been reported (Yorke, 2003;
Martínez, 2008), such as the difficulties to develop
an ambitious theoretical content in the course
program, since theory is partially substituted by
practice. Moreover, continuous assessment cannot
be effectively implemented in large groups, because
individualized attention to the learners requires a
substantial time commitment from academics.
Since a link between what the students must
learn and what is actually being evaluated must be
established, teachers must choose the most adequate
assessment method. The assessment should be
understood as a tool for improving students learning.
(Dochy, 1997). To design a continuous assessment
system, various evaluative activities with different
relative weights must be defined (Gallardo, 2010;
Gallardo, 2011). In addition to this, it has to be
decided if the final grade is obtained only by the
continuous assessment results, or if a final exam is
also performed (Haghnegahdar, 2013). The use of
this periodical assessment is not a substitute for final
exams but is an important complement in order to
define a students' learning focused assessment
method (Dochy, 2007).
The M.Sc. Civil Engineering has a highly
technological content. Students are required to
develop the highest cognitive categories, such as:
application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation
(Bloom, 1956). Technological subjects are oriented
to produce final designs or solve specific
management problems. Those designs and problems
are always unique and have to match with the site or
system specific characteristics. In this type of
subjects a final exam is highly recommendable. In
this type of subjects, partial skills have to be joined
to achieve a final objective. Different partial skills
can be evaluated separately through continuous
assessment, but their aggregation towards the final
objective can be only evaluated in a final exam.
This paper contrasts the students' learning under
two different assessment methods in a technological
subject in higher education. In the first method the
grade depends only on the final exam mark, whereas
in the second, the grade depends on the combination
of the final exam mark and the periodical exercises
ones, as continuous assessment practices were
implemented. The comparative analysis of the
assessment results under both methodologies
(continuous and traditional only by exam) may be
useful for detecting critical points, which would help
in designing and applying the assessment
methodology on the future M.Sc. Civil Engineering
subjects.
2 STUDY ON THE ASSESSMENT
OF A TECHNOLOGICAL
SUBJECT
Results of assessing a compulsory subject of the
Civil Engineering Degree, Hydraulic Engineering,
are described and analyzed. In line with the
objectives, this section is organized as follows: first
a brief description of the subject is presented, second
the evolution of the assessment methods is
described, third the factors which may influence the
assessment are analyzed, fourth the students’
performance results are presented and finally, the
investigation leads to an interesting discussion
regarding students' learning performance.
2.1 Subject Description
Hydraulic Engineering is a technological subject of
the 5
th
year of the Civil Engineering Degree at the
UPM. This degree consists of six academic years
and a final project (syllabus is shown in Figure 1).
The subject has a highly technological content.
Students need to have a strong scientific basis which
is provided during the first two academic years and a
technical previous background that is acquired
during the 3
rd
and 4
th
years of the degree. The bases
of the syllabus of this degree are established by law
(MEC, 1983). The basic academic data of the
subject are:
 Compulsory subject of the Civil Engineering
Degree.
 Teaching is annual and is divided into 2 terms.
 The form of teaching is 120 hours of lectures
during 30 weeks and about 500 hours of student
study (equivalent to 19 ECTS).
 The first term (15 weeks) covers the topic of dams.
 The second term (15 weeks) is dedicated to water
CSEDU2014-6thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
104

distribution systems, pumping technologies,
hydropower and irrigation.
 The subject provides students skills and
qualifications for: planning, developing,
projecting, managing the construction and
operating hydraulic engineering systems.
 The number of students for the 16 years of the
analysis is, on average, 450.
Figure 1: Syllabus of the Civil Engineering Degree (MEC,
1983).
2.2 Evolution of the Assessment
Methods
Before the EHEA, students were generally assessed
only by a final exam. The final grades were
proportional to the score on the exam. There were
usually three final exams. The first exam (ordinary
exam) was at the end of the second term in May or
June. Students who failed this test had two resit
exams, one in September and another in December.
Marks were within the range 0 and 10. A 0 grade
involves a very poor performance and 10 an
excellent one. The pass mark is 5.
As a result of the adaptation to the EHEA, the
continuous assessment method has been included in
the evaluation process. The method considers
several activities carried out by the students during
the course, such as attendance to lectures, classroom
tests or courseworks, and an ordinary final exam.
The final grade is the weighted sum of the mark on
the course activities and the score on the final exam.
Students who achieve a grade lower than 5 fail the
subject. In such case, learners have the two resit
exams aforesaid in the previous paragraph and the
final grade is equal to the mark on the exam.
The assessment of students for the 16 years of
analysis may be divided into three periods:
 From the academic year 1994-1995 to 2001-2002,
students were examined only by a final exam.
 A transition to continuous assessment started in the
2002-2003 academic year. The new methodology
was completely implemented after two years.
 A continuous assessment period of 6 academic
years, from 2004-2005 to 2009-2010. In this
period, up to 40 monitoring exercises were
proposed to be solved by the learners. Two types
of exercises were performed: classroom tests and
computer tests. Classroom tests were randomly
proposed and solved by student during the
lectures. The tests consisted of a theoretical or
practical question related to the concepts that were
explained during the lecture or in the immediately
previous one. The exercises were completed in
about 10 minutes. Computer tests were solved by
students at home in a VLE (the Moodle
application). The tests were composed of a unique
exercise or several questions, both related to the
lectures of the previous month. The exercises were
available for one week to the students. They have
to answer the proposed exercises in about one
hour.
2.3 Analysis of the Factors Which
Influence the Assessment
Several factors may influence assessment; among
them are: those related with people involved in the
educational process (students and academics), those
related with contents and skills to be learned and
developed, and those related with methodology
(exams, exercises, etc.).
This section analyzes the progression of these
factors during the study period. This analysis is
necessary for discussing the results and drawing
conclusions about the effectiveness of continuous
assessment. The different facts evolved as indicated
below:
 Students' profile and requirements to register in the
subject have not varied. Pre-university profile has
remained constant since 1996, when the later high-
school education law became in force. In a similar
way, the university profile has remained constant
as well; there were no changes in syllabus neither
in requirements for registering in the subject (four
years of previous scientific and technical training).
 As stated above the syllabus of the Civil
Engineering Degree didn’t change during the
period of study. That is to say, subject's contents
and structure have not been altered. However, the
contents were progressively adapted to the state of
the art, but always following the main subject’s
topics (dams, water distribution networks, etc.).
Total time devoted to each topic didn’t change
significantly.
 Additionally professional regulation has not been
SCIENTIFICTRAINNING
1
ST
YEAR
Algebra Calculus Physics Chemistry Technicaldrawing
(I)
2
ND
YEAR
Mathematical
Analysis
Mathematical
Methods
Mechanics BuildingMaterials Technical drawing
(II)
TECHNICALTRAINNING
3
RD
YEAR
Statistics Differential
Equations &
Numerical
Methods
Strength of
Materials
Geology Electricity &
Electronics
Topography English (I)
4
TH
YEAR
Structures Concrete
structures
Hydraulics Urbanism Geotechnics Economy English (II)
TECHNOLOGICALTRA INNING
5
TH
YEAR
Steel
Structures
Hydraulic
Engineering
Roads&
Highways
Engineering
Port&
Coastal
Engineering
Tran s port
Engineering
Art&History
ofCivilEng.
Specialization
in:
‐ Transp o r t
‐ Structures
‐ Hydraulics
‐ Urbanism
6
TH
YEAR
Construction Projects Railroads
Engineering
Wat e r&
Wastewater
Engineering
Business
Admin.
Laws
ContinuousAssessmentinCivilEngineeringEducation-Yes,butwithSomeConditions
105

modified during this period. Thus, subject’s
learning objectives have not change. In essence,
students have had to acquire the same knowledge
and skills.
 Academic staff has not suffered any important
modification. The main academics have been in
the same post during the period of study, and new
staff has been recruited with the same profile.
 Assessment method shifted from a traditional, only
by final exam, methodology to a continuous
assessment methodology.
 Exams have kept its structure. The number of
theoretical questions and practical exercises, the
weights and the duration has been the same during
the period of study. The difficulty of the exams has
not increased. Proposed questions and exercises
are used as base for preparing new exercises. New
exercises were similar to the previous ones, since
both look for accomplishing the same goals,
because knowledge and skills to be assessed were
the same.
2.4 Students’ Performance Results
The results of these 16 years of assessment are
shown in the next three figures. The rates of students
that passed the subject during the period of analysis
are displayed in Figure 2. This graph gives a first
idea of the continuous assessment effectiveness.
This first result has to be analysed in depth, to
understand if the method accomplished its
objectives. Further analysis is done with the help of
other graphs, showing the evolution of the subject’s
grade and the evolution of the final exam’s grade.
These facts are summarized in Figures 3 and 4.
Figure 2 presents the rate and distribution of
students that passed the subject during the regular
academic period (ordinary final exam) and the
students that passed after the extraordinary resit
exams. In can be observed that once continuous
assessment has been completely implemented
(course 2002-2003) the rate of students that passed
at the end of the regular academic period grown by
20%. It can be seen also that the rate of students that
passed after the extraordinary resit exams is very
small, ranging between the 2% and 4%. These data
lead to the idea of the success of the continuous
assessment method; but further analysis has to be
done to estimate the accomplishment of the
objective, which is not just a higher rate of students
that passed but a better students' learning
.
Figure 3 shows the evolution of the overall
grades on the subject, discriminating the students
that passed after the regular academic period and
Figure 2: Rate and distribution of students that passed.
those that did it after the extraordinary resit exams.
No upward tendency could be seen in the charts,
with both lines remaining constant along time;
which indicates that the assessment method does not
influence the final grades of the students. It can be
also seen that the students that passed after the
ordinary call (average grade of 6.93) have a better
performance than the ones that passed after the resit
calls (average grade of 6.11). That was predictable,
since the better students usually passed in the first
call, making the difference between the average
grades of the two groups.
Figure 3: Evolution of the subject's grade.
Figure 4 is useful to understand in depth, the
students’ performance. It shows the evolution of the
overall subject’s grades compared to the evolution of
the final exam’s grades. Data of this figure has been
computed only for the students that passed after the
ordinary period. For the traditional assessment
period both grades coincide, due to the fact that the
only assessment tool was the exam. Then, is
interesting to observe how a new tendency appeared
when new continuous assessment tools begun to be
47% 49% 58% 55% 54% 57% 65% 65% 66% 62% 67% 70% 81% 83% 80% 78%
12%
11%
12% 15%
12%
9%
10%
6%
6%
7%
7%
10%
4%
2%
4%
3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010
Academicyear
Resitexams Ordinar
y
finalexam
Only by final exam assessment
Continuous assessment
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010
Grade on the subject
Academic year
Resitexams(Averagegrade=6.11)
Ordinaryfinalexam(Averagegrade=6.93)
Pass mark = 5
CSEDU2014-6thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
106

operative (2002-2003 and onwards). This new
tendency is clearer when the new assessment
methodology was totally implemented. As can be
observed, the students have a poorer performance in
the final exam during the later years of the study
period, those which corresponds the continuous
assessment methodology. For the last 6 years of the
study period the average grade (6.93) is 1.61 point
over the average grade on the final exam (5.32).
Figure 4: Evolution of the subject's grade vs. final exam's
grade.
This fall of almost 25% in the final exam grades
during the last 6 years, may be due to the change in
the assessment model, because the other factors that
may influence the learning process: the students
(number and background), the subject (length,
objective and contents) and the academics (main
professors and background of the new ones); have
not had significant changes during the whole period
of analysis.
2.5 Discussion and Improvement
Measures
It is acknowledged that the study have some
limitations which should be consider when
discussing the results. It is true that the long period
of the experiment let to have more results on
students’ performance under the two methodologies;
however it should be noted that during these long
period the facts impact of the educational process
may slightly change, impacting on results. Although
the factors of the analyzed subject have remained
stable through years, further analysis on small
changes may be carry out to complement the results.
The study has been done at an aggregate scale,
comparing overall subject’s grades and final exam’s
grades. Additional disaggregation of the analysis,
regarding the evolution of the different questions
and exercises, would be useful for detecting critical
points on the students’ learning process.
Nonetheless, the experience on the assessment of a
highly technological subject under these two
systems and the comparison of their results provide
relevant information; which may be useful for
educators in order to improve the assessment
methods of such type of subjects.
The analysis of the students’ performance results
leads to three interesting conclusions, which seem to
be directly influenced by the assessment model:
 The number of students that passed the subject
under the continuous assessment method has
grown by 20% in comparison with the traditional
assessment.
 The average grade on the subject throughout the
years of study has remained steady (around 6.93
for the students that passed during the regular
academic period).
 The average grade on the final exam under the
continuous assessment has decreased in almost
25%.
In turn, aggregating these three conclusions it
can be deduced that: although continuous
assessment leads to better rates of students that
passed, the performance of those students on the
final exam is lower; so the initial objective of
improving students' learning is not completely
accomplished. There are three causes that explain
those results:
 The first cause is located in the character of the
subject. The objective of a technological subject in
higher education is to solve a general problem or
to produce a final design. This objective requires
combining all the knowledge that is explained
during the course. On another note, continuous
assessment focuses on the day by day students'
performance and may lose the view of the subject
as a whole. This fact should be taken into account
when designing the continuous assessment
method. Thus, for technological subjects, midterm
control exams may be introduced. These exams
should require students to link together the
contents that were previously explained, towards
the resolution of a problem. So that they do not
lose the overview of the subject.
 The second is located on the size of the group that
is been assessed. In continuous assessment the
students' learning process benefits from the
feedback that is periodically given. The
communication and the relationship students-
academics are more difficult in large groups, so the
effectiveness of this continuous assessment is
reduced. In this sense, VLEs are useful tools that
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010
Grade
Academic year
Gradeontheordinaryfinalexam Gradeonthesubject
Averag e 6.93
Pass mark = 5
Only by final exam assessment Continuous assessment
Average 5,32
ContinuousAssessmentinCivilEngineeringEducation-Yes,butwithSomeConditions
107

simplify the work of academics and facilitate rapid
feedback to students.
 The third one is located on the students'
psychology. The periodic tasks that were
performed during the course (room and VLE test),
are assessed and provide a mark that is taken into
account in the computation of the final grade. In
this context students reduce their work towards the
final exam, because they know that they could pass
the subject with a lower grade in the final exam.
So they relax and calibrate their effort. This
circumstance should be considered when defining
the tasks, the weights and the subject’s regulations.
For technological subjects, in which a final exam
should be carried out, it is highly recommended to
require an independent minimum grade in this
exam.
3 CONCLUSIONS
During the last decade, the continuous assessment
methods have been imposed in the new educational
systems (as the EHEA). Presumably, under this
assessment system, students are more involved
during the course, resulting in higher rates of
students who pass and higher grades. These factors
are associated to a wider development of skills and a
better learning performance. There is no doubt about
the benefits of continuous assessment; but in
technological subjects in higher education it should
be implemented under some conditions. Otherwise it
may lead to a poorer learning.
The case study shown in this paper proves that
lower learning performances could be masked under
higher rates of students that passed or higher grades.
The reasons lie in the weighting of the different
tasks and in the psychology of the students, since
they reduce their effort once they achieved a
satisfactory mark in the continuous training, loosing
interest for the final exam. This final exam is an
important assessment tool in technological subjects,
in which students should link together all the parts of
the course to solve a general problem or to produce a
complete design.
To avoid this problem, some additional
conditions should be introduced when designing
continuous assessment, such as: to set midterm
exams for providing an overview of the subject, to
take advantage of the VLEs to offer a effective
feedback to the students, and to set a minimum mark
on the final exam, independent of the other course
task’ marks.
REFERENCES
Bloom, B. S., Taxonomy of educational objectives.
Handbook I: cognitive domains. David McKay Co.
Inc., New York, US.
Delgado, A. M. (Coord.), 2005. Competencias y diseño de
la evaluación continua y final en el espacio superior.
Dirección General de Universidades, Madrid, Spain.
Dochy, F., and Mc Dowell, L., 1997. Assessment as a tool
for learning. Studies in Educational evaluation, 23,
279-298.
Dochy F., Segers, M., Gijbels, D. and Struyven K., 2007.
Assessment engineering: breaking down barriers
between teaching and learning, and assessment. In
Rethinking assessment in higher education: learning
for the longer term. Routledge, Oxon, UK.
Gallardo, E., Montolio, D., and Camós, M., 2010. The
European Higher Education Area at work: Lights and
shadows defining continuous assessment. Revista
d'Innovació Docent Universitària, 2, 10-22.
Gallardo, E., 2011. ¿Existe relación entre la evaluación
continua y los resultados de los alumnos?. Revista
Electrónica sobre la Enseñanza de la Economía
Pública, 8, 63-69.
García-Beltrán, A. and Martínez, R., 2002. The role of
self-assessment in AulaWeb e-learning system. In
European Distance Education Network (EDEN)
Annual Conference, Granada, Spain.
Haghnegahdar, A., 2013. Alternatives to heavily-weighted
final exams in engineering courses. Teaching
Innovation Projects, 3(1), article 2.
Hernández, R., 2012. Does continuous assessment in
higher education support student learning?. Higher
Education, 64(4), 489-502.
Isaksson, S., 2007. Assess as you go: The effect of
continuous assessment on student learning during a
short course in archaeology. Assessment and
Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(1), 1-7.
Joughin, G., 2009. Assessment, learning and judgment in
higher education: A critical review. In G. Joughin
(Ed.), Assessment, learning and judgment in higher
education, 13-27.
Martínez, M., 2008. La importancia de los nuevos modos
de evaluación en el EEES. Una aproximación a las
ventajas del uso del portafolio. Revista de Enseñanza
Universitaria, 31, 62-72.
MCIN (Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación), 2009a. Orden
CIN/307/2009 por la que se establecen los requisitos
para la verificación de los títulos universitarios
oficiales que habiliten para el ejercicio de la profesión
de Ingeniero Técnico de Obras Públicas. Boletín
Oficial del Estado, de 9 febrero.
MCIN (Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación), 2009b.
Orden CIN/309/2009 por la que se establecen los
requisitos para la verificación de los títulos
universitarios oficiales que habiliten para el ejercicio
de la profesión de Ingeniero de Caminos, Canales y
Puertos. Boletín Oficial del Estado, de 9 febrero.
MEC (Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia), 1983. Orden
por la que se aprueba el nuevo Plan de Estudios de la
CSEDU2014-6thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation
108

Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros de Caminos,
Canales y Puertos de la Universidad Politécnica de
Madrid. Boletín Oficial del Estado, de 9 septiembre.
Trotter, E., 2006. Student perceptions of continuous
summative assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education, 31(5), 505-521.
Yorke, M., 2003. Formative assessment in higher
education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement
of pedagogic practice. Higher Education, 45, 477-501.
ContinuousAssessmentinCivilEngineeringEducation-Yes,butwithSomeConditions
109