Keynote I - What Makes Good Feedback Good?

 Professor Margaret Price, Oxford Brookes University

The keynote speaker addressed student feedback in the context of a higher education environment, that is dynamic and subject to a large number of external and internal pressures. Within that context, there appears to be general consensus that feedback is a crucial component of learning and assessment, and that assessment itself is a key driver of learning. Professor Price pointed out that the discourse of assessment is relatively simple for such a complex subject and suggested a need for new and more descriptive terminology than exists at present. She also noted the added pressure of higher student expectations and a louder student voice from ‘customers’ paying high fees.

Oxford Brookes and Cardiff have collaborated on a new piece of research, examining what makes feedback good in the perceptions of the students and what domains influence these perceptions of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ in this context. The project used student researchers and a cross-discipline approach. Students taking part were asked to bring one piece of ‘good’ feedback and one ‘bad’. They were interviewed around these pieces and then the feedback was analysed. The domains used in the analysis covered quality, context, student development and expectations and were further divided into areas such as technical factors, particularity (i.e. personal/impersonal feedback), recognition of effort, assessment design (crucial), student resilience (can they accept criticism?), student desires (to learn or to achieve a high grade?) etc. The full report is available at http://www.brookes.ac.uk/aske/.

The research found that the domains overlapped and compensated for each other so that feedback that was poor in one domain might be good in another, and vice versa. Three important messages for those giving feedback that emerged were:

• Give it plenty of time
• Train, develop and support staff in giving feedback
• Limit anonymous feedback (personalised feedback scored highly)

Professor Price suggested that students need to develop their assessment literacy if they are to be able to gain the most from assessment and feedback. This can be done through developing their technical understanding of marking and grading, through self and peer assessment, and through an appreciation of what grading criteria actually mean. She pointed out that academics see hundreds of pieces of work and have a tacit understanding of what a 2:1 looks like, for example, but how are students to know this? Give them good examples was the answer and put them through stages of self-assessment, peer review, drafting, re-drafting and perhaps peer assisted learning where more experienced students support beginners and help them to develop their assessment literacy.

An overarching message resulting from the research was that ‘You don’t need to get it right all the time’: students are very forgiving of delayed feedback or low grades when they can see that there has been a real effort to engage with their individual piece of work. Examples of good practice are available at https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/whats-on/inclusive-assessment-in-practice-conference.

Finally – she concluded by saying that this should go beyond university and students should leave having developed these valuable self-evaluation skills to take with them into the future.

Report by Celia Cozens, e-Learning Content Manager, Centre for Academic Practice Enhancement (CAPE)

Track A2 - Can Assessment Literacy be Enhanced and does it Lead to Improved Student Performance? A Case Study of Year One Business and Management Students at Middlesex University Business School

Simon Roberts, Middlesex University, Business School
Ana Marinica, Centre for Academic Practice Enhancement (CAPE)
Karim Qizalbash, Learner Development Unit (LDU)

Simon Roberts started off the presentation by providing an overview of assessment literacy in the context of a project carried out in the Business School. The 12 week enhanced programme  and MBS0111 Preparing for Business have been evaluated through an assessment literacy lens and findings were discussed as part of the session. Students enrolled on the enhanced programme failed to meet their conditional offer with regard to required UCAS points and were offered a 12 week course that aimed at preparing them for University. The programme was designed in collaboration with the Learner Development Unit. Interestingly, it consisted of 12 hours of teaching in a week, 6 of which were delivered by the LDU in order to develop students’ academic writing skills.

Assessment literacy can be defined as students’ ability to translate and appreciate the relationship between students’ learning and assessment as well as assessment criteria, feedback practices and the level of assessment they are presented with. Ana also highlighted the importance of assessment in a student’s learning journey. Assessment has been looked at with regard to what students find to be important, how they spend their time and at the end how they see themselves as students and later on as graduates. The key issue identified in this project is the fact that students often don’t understand what a good piece of coursework is and what is expected from them, especially with regard to assessment criteria. 

Karim Qizalbash presented on how the team has employed a model by O’Donovan et al, (2008) - Approaches to Developing Student Understanding of Assessment Standards when evaluating the 12 week programme. The techniques Karim employed based on the feedback received from students at the beginning of the course were to make all the learning materials relevant to the assessment which included an essay and presentations. Formal 1-2-1 tutorials, general teacher lead instructions in seminars, individual/group tasks and peer review exercises were part of the 12 week programme.

The evaluation of the project consisted of both quantitative and qualitative data collection and two cohorts of students - enhanced and January start students were compared. The initial findings showed that the grades of the enhanced students were lower across all the assessments (with the exception of HRM1004), however the enhanced students had perceived higher clarity of the requirements of each assessment and were slightly more confident than their January start counterparts. 

Most of the discussions which took place during the workshop evolved around the implications and possible issues of managing the enhanced students and how the findings of this project can be disseminated and put into practice by the Programme Team. For further details, please have a look at the video and PowerPoint slides from this session.

Report by Natalia Czuba, Educational Technologist, Centre for Academic Practice Enhancement (CAPE)

Track C2: Developing quality feedback and assessment literacy in dance

 Julia K. Gleich
 Head of Choreography (London Studio Centre)

London Studio Centre’s shared their institution development of their Learning & Teaching Strategy 2013-18 focussing on assessment and feedback. The nature of practice at LSC makes use of intense continuous, day-to-day formative feedback by both tutors and peers, which ac
counts for unusual learning experience in HE. Addressing the high frequency of assessment and feedback is at centre of LSC’s culture of quality enhancement and review of assessment strategies that have led to significant successes in the National Student Survey.

The institution has reviewed strategies associated with developing effective feedback and assessment that include ways of creatively assessing creativity and identified points to consider in constructing effective feedback.

Identified Issues related to creative assessment:

·         How to “prepare for assessment” in a context of creativity

·         Prior learning

·         Tick-boxing / Goal-oriented-ness

·         Subjectivity

·         House styles

·         New ideas and risk-taking

                                                        

The staff at LSC also recognize that Assessment Literacy is a double-edged sword and if students are too focused on assessment, they will be unwilling to take risks and discover their own voices in a creative environment. In addition, Assessment tasks and criteria must be designed to reward even “inappropriate” choices as students re-invent themselves and develop new movement vocabularies, explore compositional strategies and form their artistic identities.

Constructing feedback

At LSC feedback is provided taking into consideration the points below:

·         Specificity

·         Constructive comments

·         Appropriate language

·         Transparency – see example below. If not clear from the starting point comments like “ student needs to be more analytical” – are not clear.

·         Enabling and encouraging/Positive but honest

·         Personal

The presentation also included seven principles of good feedback practice From Dr Nicol and Debra Macfarlane-Dick below:

“good feedback practice should facilitate the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning, encourage dialogue, clarify what is good performance, deliver quality information about the students learning, provide information to teachers to shape learning and should be motivational for the students and create positive self-esteem.”

Creatively Assessing Creativity from mdxaltc

Report by Betty Sinyinza, Educational Tehcnologist, Centre for Academic Practice Enhancement (CAPE)