assessment and feedback study group project

An Investigationinto FormativeFeedback to

Enhance StudentLearning

December 132011

A series of case

Fabrizio Gallai, Caroline Jones, Udayangani KulatungaJohn McMahon Fiona Velez-Colby

studies from theUniversity of Salford

Investigation into Formative Feedback to Enhance

Student LearningA series of case studies from the

University of SalfordIntroduction

In 2009 the University of Salford adopted a strategic plan which commits the institution to the achievement

of an upper quartile position in university league tables by 2017. Goal 1 in the strategic plan focuses on

learning and teaching; in particular, target 1.3 is to raise the recorded level in the National Student Survey

(NSS) for teaching quality, assessment and feedback, and organisation and management. It is therefore clear

that assessment and feedback play a central role in the University’s new plan. This also mirrors what Biggs

and Tang (2007: 97) state, i.e. “so important is formative feedback that the effectiveness of any particular

teaching/learning activity can be judged by how well it provides feedback to students as they learn.”

Following group discussion relating to specific feedback and assessment practices engaged by all group

members it was felt the area most relevant to all members would be the examination of formative feedback

as it is directly related to both the experiences and professional issues faced by the five group members (UK

PSF AoA 3, 6). Each group member chose a particular aspect of formative feedback according to a study

carried out by the LTSN Generic Centre (now Higher Education Academy) on Student Enhanced Learning

through Effective Feedback (SENLEF) to “develop a resource for practitioners wishing to improve their

feedback practice to students or get some new ideas on how to enhance their current practice” (Juwah,

Macfarlane-Dick, Matthew, Nicol, Ross & Smith 2004: 2).

Seven principles for good effective practice were identified as a result of this project. These are listed below

(Juwah, Macfarlane-Dick, Matthew, Nicol, Ross and Smith 2004: 2):

1. Facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning.

2. Encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning.

3. Helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, and expected standards).

4. Provides opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance.

5. Delivers high quality information to students about their learning.

6. Encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem.

7. Provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching.

The range of subjects taught, teaching styles prior to the case studies and methods feedback methods

employed by our action learning set are listed below. The diverse list clearly shows how the good feedback

practices identified for the purpose of this investigation can be employed across a wide range of subject

areas and learning environments throughout Higher Education (Stefani and Nicol 1997).

• Sports Science - Strength and Conditioning Levels 5 & 6 - Method of delivery practical involving small

group tasks (approx 20 per session put in groups of 4-5) focusing on weightlifting technique and

coaching, including the student's ability to give feedback (i.e. Proficiency in coaching) - Case study

investigating Principle No 1.

• Quantity Surveying Discipline Project Year 2 / Level 5 - Teaching style previous to case study was large

group lecturing (approx 85 full-time and 50 part-time). Formative feedback methods were online test

with immediate results, but no dialogue with lecturer - Case study investigating Principle No2.

•Social Policy - Research Methods \Level 4 - Method of delivery seminars of approx 25-30 students with 2

assignments within the module. Formative feedback about assignments is given during the seminars -

Case study investigating Principle No 3.

• Italian Language - Italian Written Language Level 4 - Method of delivery is typically seminars of approx

10-15 students with 1 formative mid semester feedback in verbal form, 1 written formative feedback

and 1 summative feedback in written format - Case study investigating Principle No 6.

•Design Management Year 3 / Level 6 - Method of delivery prior to the case study was small group

lecturing (approx 8-10) using verbal formative feedback relating to the written assignment during

individual tutorials. - Case study investigating Principle No 7.

Each member of the group identified one of the7 principles of good feedback practice as identified in the

Student Enhanced Learning through Effective Feedback (SENLEF) project in 2004 (Juwah et al. 2004).

Individually the group analysed one of the principles on good feedback practice by engaging with literature

specifically focusing on one particular aspect of formative feedback, the results of each specific case study

follow:

In-Class Peer Feedback and Self-Assessment (Reflection)

John McMahon

School of Health, Sport and Rehabilitation Sciences

Aim and objectives

Aim: To encourage and facilitate in-class peer verbal feedback and self-assessment of learning in order to

enhance student learning and achievement (UKPSF-AoA3)

Objectives:

• to introduce students to self-assessment of learning

• to enhance student engagement with peer verbal feedback

• to facilitate constant reflection of in-class performance

• to encourage students to direct their own learning outcomes

Background

One of the seven principles of good feedback practice is that it should “Facilitate the development of self-

assessment (reflection) in learning” (Juwah et al. 2004; Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006). Self-assessment can

significantly enhance both learning and achievement, when appropriately organised within the Higher

Education setting (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006). Research showed that students who were given self-

assessment training over the course of the academic year significantly improved their performance during

end-of-year examinations (McDonald and Boud 2003). Integrating internal (student) and external (tutor

and/or peer) feedback was found to be an extremely beneficial method of delivering self-assessment

training and one which was favoured by the participating students (Taras 2003).

The general consensus among authors within self-assessment literature is that too much emphasis placed on

tutor assessment (as is commonly associated with Higher Education) may decrease students’ ability to self-

assess and self-correct, by increasing their reliance on others (Juwah et al. 2004). Therefore, self-assessment

training would provide students with the skills to effectively judge how their work relates to the identified

standards and criteria (Boud 1986). Furthermore, it has been suggested that if self-assessment training was

to be provided for the entire duration of an undergraduate programme, it would effectively prepare

students for lifelong learning (Boud 2000).

Self-assessment is considered to be an evolution towards a more inclusive democratic learning environment

(Somervell 1993; Dearing 1997) as it promotes greater equality of power between teachers and students

(Taras 2008), which has been shown to enhance student learning (Black and William 1998; Nicol and

Macfarlane-Dick 2006). It is also postulated that self-assessment provides inclusivity among students from

any level and/or stage of the assessment process (Taras 2008). Finally, it has been theorised that competent

and resourceful use of self-assessment is the only paradigm which enables students to develop essential

skills for professional practice (Boud 1995; Taras 2001).

In order to develop students’ self-assessment skills, it has been suggested that teachers should provide them

with more structured opportunities for developing their capacity for self-monitoring and judging their

progression towards pre-determined goals (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006). This can be achieved either

through peer assessment and feedback (Boud et al. 1999; Gibbs 1999) and/or through the implementation

of regular in-class self-reflection opportunities (Cowan 1999).

Evaluation

To assess whether level six Sports Science students perceived in-class peer verbal feedback and self-

assessment of learning to enhance their learning, a questionnaire (Appendix 1) was completed by them

(UKPSF-CK5), following their final taught session of semester one.

Table 1: Questionnaire answers expressed as a percentage

Q Somewhat Quite a lot Very much

1 50 502 50 503 17 33 504 50 505 33 33 336 33 33 337 17 50 338 50 509 50 50

Total 12 44 44

The results of the questionnaire are presented in Table 1. The results suggest that students perceived in-

class peer verbal feedback and self-assessment of learning to be a positive and valued process, with 88% of

the class selecting ‘quite a lot’ and ‘very much’ as answers for the majority of questions listed in Appendix 1.

However, there was a trend towards students perceiving peer in-class feedback to be of greater benefit to

their learning when compared to self-assessment (reflection).

Positive aspects (for students)

• Giving/receiving in-class peer verbal feedback facilitated coaching and technique

• Regular in-class self-assessment (reflection) facilitated coaching and technique

• The majority of students think that they will continue to give/receive in-class peer verbal feedback and

self-assess (reflect) for their continuing professional development

Positive aspects (for teachers)

• Allows teachers to become facilitators rather than dictators of student learning

• Provides teachers with a method of assessing understanding during each session

• Enables a greater amount of content to be delivered during each session

• Provides teachers with opportunities to create dialogue around the topic areas

Negative aspects

• When first introduced, some students took time to effectively engage and feel comfortable with giving

and receiving peer verbal feedback and regularly reflecting

Lessons learnt

The implications of this case study for teaching practice are that in-class peer verbal feedback and self-

assessment of learning can enhance student learning and achievement, by enhancing their ability to

effectively judge their performance and progression towards pre-defined goals.

What would I change when carrying out this in the future?

I would introduce these methods at the beginning of the semester, or preferably when the students

commence their undergraduate studies, rather than part-way through, in order to encourage engagement

with these methods for a longer overall duration and allow time for them to develop the necessary skills,

particularly in self-assessment, in order for them to participate in these tasks more effectively.

Good practice and transferability

When appropriately introduced, regular in-class peer verbal feedback and self-assessment (reflection) of

learning opportunities can positively influence learning and achievement, especially in a practical setting. I

believe that these methods can effectively transfer across a range of subject areas; however, future research

is required in order to test this hypothesis.

Further information and references

•Black, P. and William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning, Assessment in Education: Principles.

Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7-74.

• Boud, D.(1986). Implementing Student Self-Assessment(Sydney, Higher Education Research and

Development Society of Australia).

•Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page.

•Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society, Studies in

Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167.

•Boud, D., Cohen, R. and Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment, Assessment and Evaluation in

Higher Education, 24(4), 413-426.

•Cowan, J. (1999). Being an innovative university teacher (Buckingham, SRHE & Open University Press).

•Dearing, Sir R. (1997). Higher education in learning and society. London: HMSO.

•Gibbs, G. (1999). Using assessment strategically to change the way students learn, in: S. Brown and A.

Glasner(Eds) Assessment Matters in Higher Education: Choosing and Using Diverse Approaches

(Buckingham, SRHE/Open University Press).

• Juwah, C., Macfarlane-Dick, D., Matthew, B., Nichol, D., Ross, D., and Smith, B. (2004). Enhancing Student

Learning Through Effective Formative Feedback. York: The Higher Education Academy.

• McDonald, B. and Boud, D. (2003). The impact of self-assessment on achievement: the effects of self-

assessment training on performance in external examinations, Assessment in Education, 10(2), 209-220.

•Nicol, D. J. and MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model

and seven principles of good feedback practice Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.

•Somervell, H. (1993). Issues in assessment, enterprise and higher education: the case for self, peer and

collaborative assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(3), 221-233.

•Taras, M. (2001). The use of tutor feedback and student self-assessment in summative assessment tasks:

towards transparency for students and for tutors. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(6),

606-614.

•Taras, M. (2003). To feedback or not to feedback in student self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation

in Higher Education, 28(5), 549-565.

•Taras, M. (2008). Issues of power and equity in two models of self-assessment. Teaching in Higher

Education, 13(1), 81-92.

Q Questions regarding your perception of peer feedback and self-assessment in Advanced S&C

Not really

Some-what

Quite a lot

Very much

1 Do you think that giving feedback to your peers facilitated the development of your coaching?

2 Do you think that receiving feedback from your peers facilitated the development of your coaching?

3 Do you think that giving feedback to your peers facilitated the development of your exercise technique?

4 Do you think that receiving feedback from your peers facilitated the development of your exercise technique?

5 Do you think that self-assessing (reflecting upon) your coaching facilitated the development of your subsequent coaching practice?

6 Do you think that self-assessing (reflecting upon) your exercise technique facilitated the development of your subsequent exercise technique?

7 Do you think it was beneficial to receive peer-feedback from the entire class at once?

8 Do you think you will continue to give and receive peer-feedback as part of your continuing professional development as a coach?

9 Do you think you will continue to self-assess (reflect upon) as part of your continuing professional development as a coach?

10 Are there any other comments that you would like to make with regards to your perception of peer-feedback and self-assessment as it applies to S&C coaching?

Appendix 1: Feedback Questionnaire: In-Class Peer Feedback and Self-Assessment

Formative Feedback to Encourage teacher and peer dialogue around learning

Udayangani Kulatunga

Quantity Surveying, School of the Built Environment

Feedback for student learning can take many forms and from many parties including teacher, peer, external

assessors. Based on the feedback received for a task, learners can evaluate, self-correct and progress their

work to produce a good outcome (Juwah et al. 2004). One of the main advantages of feedback is the

discussion forum which feedback linked to. The dialogue created between teachers and peers around

learning has been identified as one of the seven principles of good feedback. As asserted by (Juwah et al.

2004), to increase effectiveness of feedback, it needs to be provided as a dialogue rather than information

transmission. Hyland (2000) views that often learners do not understand the feedback provided to them.

Cox (1987) identifies lack of time given for students to consolidate their learning during their lectures. Due to

the time pressures in completing the module content, teachers tend to rush their lecture without providing

opportunity for students to reflect on their learning. However, when a dialogue is created around feedback,

the tendency of learners understanding feedback can be improved. The dialogue created around feedback

facilitates students to go into deep discussions not only around the particular task given by the teacher but

generally around a subject matter. The possibility of creating such effective dialogue based on the subject

matter is being identified by Freemen and Lewis (1998) as a positive impact of feedback. Nicol and Boyle

(2003) notes that the dialogue created between students and teachers can provide a good platform for

teacher managed discussions. Further, such dialogue provides students to immediately correct their mis-

concepts, misunderstandings about a subject matter (Juwah et al. 2004).

One of the interactive teaching methods that I used for my teaching create dialogue between teacher and

students. Interactive teaching encourages students to behave and feel more engaged with the lecturer and

peers without simply attending a lecture as a passive recipient (Light and Cox 2001). Light and Cox (2001)

further identify that interactive teaching as a mode of addressing “social dimension” of learning by helping

to create an environment where staff and students work together while creating a good dialogue between

them. The interactive learning method that I used was the Qwizdom clicker system. Hoffman and Goodwin

(2006) view that student learning is improved by responding to questions answered using clickers and

subsequent discussions carried out in the class based on them. These discussions were not only targeted at

the questions post, but also lead to deep learning around the subject matter.

Qwizdom voting system as a method of formative feedback

Aim and objectives

Aim: To improve teaching and learning with the use of Technology Enhanced Learning methods used in the

higher education (UK PSF-CK4)

Objectives:

• to create an effective dialogue between students and teachers around the subject matter

• to improve student engagement for learning

• to evaluate student’s understanding of the subject matter

• to provide formative feedback for students on the regular (weekly) basis

• to address the issue of late arriving students without repeating subject matter that’s being already

discussed

Background

Qwizdom voting system was used as a formative feedback method for UG year 2 fulltime and part-time

students who are following Quantity Surveying degree programme. Qwizdom device was used at the

beginning of the session for the “re-cap” session that lasted for about 15-20 minutes. The questions mainly

targeted the content of the previous lecture. This provided a good understanding for both the student and

tutor about student’s knowledge and understanding about the subject content. Qwizdon is capable of

producing graphical illustrations based on the answers given by the student (% of correct and wrong

answers) which provided a good basis for students to compare themselves against class average

performance. Further, final questions of the Qwizdom session were focused on the current lecture of the

day. After each question, a feedback dialogue was created regarding the questions. This dialogue provided a

good basis for student and tutor to discuss about the subject matter in general.

Evaluation

The impact of this initiative was measured by distributing and evaluating a questionnaire to students

(UKPSF- CK5). The questions were prepared by using a Likert scale (Appendix 1). Following positive and

negative aspect of this initiative was obtained.


• Interactive nature of the subject

• Improve understanding of the subject matter

• Effective feedback discussions leading to previous and current lecture

• Effective feedback discussions leading to overall subject matter

• Anonymously of providing answers to questions

• Evaluating students’ position in terms of the overall class performance


• Provide opportunity for the teacher to create dialogue around the subject matter

• Provide feedback on the student understanding

• Provide feedback on the level of understanding of different students (PT and FT)

Negative aspects

• Technical difficulties when running the system

Lessons learnt

• This was the first time Qwizdom device was used for the lecturer and it was started during the 6th week

of the lecture series. Therefore, expectations and standard that would be expected from the students

were not in place. Accordingly, for the next semester, expectations and standards will be set up from the

very beginning of lecturers.

What would I change when carrying out this in the future:

• Facilitate the use of Qwizdom device within pairs or between three students. This will also help to create

discussions within group of students which will further enhance learning. Crouch and Mazur (2001) note

that peer discussions help students to develop their knowledge significantly. Similarly, Light and Cox

(2001) assert that areas difficult for the lecturer to help students to learn are better learned though peer

discussions.

• Would explore more literature to ascertain best types of questions that suite Qwizdom


Preparation of Qwizdom questions requires commitment and time, however, the student engagement is

very positive for this initiative. I believe this method is transferable across the university. It is expected to

share this knowledge during the scholarship week of the School of the Built Environment.


• Cox, K, 1987, Knowledge which cannot be used is useless, Medical Teacher 9, 145-154

• Freeman, R. and Lewis, R. (1998) Planning and Implementing Assessment. London: Kogan Page.

• Hoffman, C., & Goodwin, S. (2006). A clicker for your thoughts: Technology for active learning. New

Library World, 107(1228/1229), pp 422-433.

• Hyland, P. (2000) Learning from feedback on assessment. In Booth, A. and Hyland, P. (eds.), The practice

of university history teaching. Manchester: Manchester University Press.



• Light G and Cox R (2003) Learning and Teaching in higher education, SAGE, London

• Nicol, D.J. and Boyle, J.T. (2003) Peer Instruction versus Class-wide Discussion in large classes: a

comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom. Studies in Higher Education 28 (4), 457-

473.

Appendix 1: Feedback Questionnaire: Use of Qwizdom remote voting system

Please identify the level of your agreement for the below questions.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

The use of Qwizdom voting system

1 Increased my engagement at the class

2 Improved my understanding of the subject matter

3 Increased discussions based on the subject matter

4 Motivated me to provide answer due to its Anonymous nature

5 Evaluated my position within the class average performance

6 Improved learning

7 Directed me for the areas that I need to study

8 Time consuming

9 Has technical difficulties when setting up

10 Other

Helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, expected standards).

Caroline Jones

Research Methods , Social Policy

According to Sadler and Black and William, “students can only achieve a learning goal if they understand

that goal, assume some ownership of it, and can assess progress” (cited in Juwah et al. 2004:8). Juwah et al

cite various studies which found that students’ ideas of what was required for the assignment differed

considerably from their tutors. This is a problem which has affected me recently, although the assignment to

which it relates produces the same issue every year. The assessment is the first one the Year 4 students

have. It is for Research Methods, and it is a literature review. Every year, we all patiently explain what is

required and how a literature review differs from an essay. We explain it again. And again. And again. Every

year, we are presented with the finished assignments, and every year, about half to three quarters of the

pieces are essays, not literature reviews. Each year, the assessment description is modified in an attempt to

make it easier to understand, but each year, the result is more or less the same. The problem seems to be

that the students just do not understand what is expected of them. They have usually come from college

where they have written essays. They have come to university expecting to write essays, yet the first thing

they are expected to write is not an essay.

Juwah et al suggest: “Weak and incorrect conceptions of goals not only influence what students do but

also

the value of feedback information” (2004:9), explaining that if the misunderstanding about what was

expected is huge, then it “will be difficult for students to evaluate gaps between required and actual

performance” (2004:9). In many ways, the feedback my students receive afterwards is pointless, partly for

these reasons and partly because some of them will never be asked to write a literature review again, and

those that are will not be expected to do this until Level 6.

One way around this is to provide “written documents embodying descriptive statements that externalise

assessment goals and the standards that define different levels of achievement” (2004:9). However, Juwah

et al go on to explain that this has been shown not to work, which is certainly borne out by my experiences.

Even verbal explanations do not help greatly, according to these studies, which again is my experience.

One solution to my own problem might be to change the assignments around so that the Literature Review

is not the first thing the students are faced with. Hopefully, by the time they come to it, they will be better

equipped to understand what is being asked. The counter argument to this is that a literature review is a

building block on which most research is conducted, so it makes logical sense to address it first. Also, if

Juwah et al’s findings are correct (2004), it would not make much difference where in the course the

literature review was situated. Dropping the assignment completely in favour of something else, is another

option but one that is not within my remit at the present time.

Juwah et al’s suggestion is the use of exemplars (2004), examples of what is required—in this case, of

literature reviews. This is something I will be suggesting to the module leaders. I think that it could make a

huge difference to the students’ understanding of what a literature review actually it. It is a simple solution,

yet I am confident that it will be very effective. Seeing an example can work so much better than even the

best explanation and is a technique I use a lot to great effect on another course I teach on. In fact, I cannot

believe that I have not thought of transferring that idea from the other course to this one.

Other suggestions include letting the student’s mark each other’s work and holding workshops where

assignments are devised in collaboration with the students. These are also good ideas and are things I will be

thinking about in the future.

Blended (oral and written) method of formative feedback

Fabrizio Gallai

School of Languages

Aim and objectives

Aim: To motivate students by adopting a joint oral and written method of feedback and, in turn, helping to

achieve elements of equality and diversity (UK PSF PV1)

Objectives:

• to enhance student motivation and self-esteem

• to enhance student engagement with learning

• to assess students’ understanding of the subject matter

• to improve equality and diversity by catering for different learning requirements

Background

A key outcome of the self-regulation and feedback model (Juwah, Macfarlane-Dick, Matthew, Nicol, Ross

and Smith 2004; Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006) is the set of principles and focus questions indicating what

good assessment and feedback should do. In particular, I have focused on the principle which states that

feedback should “encourage positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem”.

Research has shown that such a blended (oral and written) formative feedback approach leads to

improvements in levels of attainment (Black and Wiliam 1998) an it is also not difficult to see the positive

effect that it can have on levels of student motivation.

Evaluation

The impact of this initiative was measured by distributing a questionnaire (UKPSF- CK5) to second year

students (Appendix 1) on the feedbacks received for their first Italian written formative assessment (Writing

a covering letter in Italian). The first (oral) feedback was on the first draft of the formative assignment,

whereas the second (written) feedback was on the final version of the written formative assessment.

Such questionnaires “have reasonable levels of validity” (Gibbs 2010: 27). The questions are based on Table

2 on Formative Feedback Guidelines to Enhance Learning (Things to Do) drawn from Shute’s (2007: 30) paper

entitled Focus on Formative Feedback). In particular, the answers to question 8 (Did the feedback emphasise

that effort yields increased learning and performance and that mistakes are an important part of the

learning process?) were the following;

This shows that external feedback mainly has a (very) positive effect on motivational beliefs and on self-

esteem. It influences how students feel about themselves which, in turn, affects what and how they learn.

Lastly this highlights the following positive and negative aspects of this feedback method:


• Lead to detailed feedback discussion

• Enhance understanding of overall subject matter through motivation and self-esteem

• Improve students’ subsequent interest in learning and performance


• Provide opportunity for the teacher to exchange views

• Provide feedback on student understanding

• Provide feedback on the level of understanding of individual students

Negative aspects

• Combining verbal and written feedback takes time

• Students might not be willing to receive feedback twice

Lessons learnt

The implication of this case study for teaching practice is that motivation and self-esteem are likely to be

enhanced when a course has low-stakes tasks with formative feedback geared to providing information

regarding progress and achievement. Combining oral and written feedback means that students who have a

tendency to compare themselves against others - rather than to focus on the difficulties in the task - will

have fewer chances to do so.

What would I change when carrying out this in the future:

Aspects that I would change to encourage high levels of motivation to succeed include:

(1) giving marks on final written assignment only after students have responded to feedback comments;

(2) giving time for students to re-write selected pieces of work according to written feedback;

(3) some forms of peer- and self-assessment can be useful if these are well structured and use clear criteria.

Not really: 0% A bit: 2% Quite a bit: 18% Very much: 80%


Preparation of both oral and written feedback requires time. However, if we are to raise the levels of

achievement of the students, then we should be keen to develop our own practice in this area and provide

students with overwhelmingly positive experiences of the assessment process.

In addition to these benefits to student identified above, the use of the survey has benefited my practice. It

has helped me to engage with the students and find out more about their learning needs.

Transferable practices are:

- oral and/or written feedback on a formatively assessed work midway through the semester;

- alternatively a short piece of summatively assessed work may be completed for feedback.


• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5 (1), 7-74.

• Gibbs, G. (2010) The assessment of group work: lessons from the literature. Oxford: Assessment

Standards Knowledge Exchange. Available from:

www.brookes.ac.uk/aske/documents/Brookes%20groupwork%20/Gibbs%20Dec%2009.pdf [November

2011].



• Nicol, D. J. and MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model

and seven principles of good feedback practice Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.

• Shute, V. J. (2007). Focus on formative feedback. ETS Research Report, RR-07-11 (pp. 1-47), Princeton, NJ.

Appendix 1: Feedback questionnaire

Italian Written Language - 2nd Year

Course Assignment 1 (Write a Covering Letter)

Student Evaluation on Formative Feedback

Looking at the Formative Feedback given on your first course assignment (Write a Covering Letter), I would

welcome your experience, evaluation and any suggestion for improvement.

- Please rate the items by placing an X in the appropriate column:

Are there any other comments you would like to make about the formative feedback?

Not really

A bit Quite a bit

Very much

1 Did the feedback address specific features of your work in relation to the task, with suggestions on how to improve?

2 Did the feedback describe the what, how, and/or why of a given problem?

3 Did you feel that the feedback was elaborated in small enough pieces so that it was not too overwhelming?

4 Were the feedback messages specific and clear?

5 Was the feedback simple and focused?

6 Did the feedback clarify goals and seek to reduce or remove uncertainty in relation to how well you are performing on the task and what needs to be accomplished to attain the goals?

7 Was the feedback unbiased and objective?

8 Did the feedback emphasise that effort yields increased learning and performance and that mistakes are an important part of the learning process?

9 Did the feedback note areas of strength and provide information on how to improve?

10 Was the feedback too controlling or critical?

Feedback provides information to teachers that can be used to shape their teaching

Fiona Velez-Colby

Design Futures, School of Art and Design

Literature Review

The importance of formative feedback is well documented, and can be argued as the educational

intervention that has the most impact on a student’s learning (Gibbs 2010), a factor strengthened when it is

delivered quickly and efficiently to students (Angelo and Cross 1990). However good feedback does not only

benefit the student but also provides the teacher with information about the learning styles and level of

subject understanding of individual students, this information can then be used to improve the teaching

being delivered to the student (Yorke 2003).

Teachers can effectively use formative feedback given to students to formulate a reactive response to their

individual learning needs. However in order to be produce relevant feedback to students, teachers need

good data about how students are progressing (Juwah 2010) both in terms of their subject understanding

and their study skills. To use this information effectively teachers must establish practices to digest the data

and then incorporate this information into the teaching of that individual student or group of students; the

process of reviewing and altering their teaching has to be immediate (Angelo and Cross 1990) and must be

delivered to the same cohort. Strategies that enable teachers to both provide regular and immediate

feedback to students also allow both parties to share their concepts of teaching and learning on a regular

basis (Juwah 2010) which has the effect of aiding the teacher to support the student’s ability to engage in

independent learning and develop their understanding of what their role in the learning process should be

(Gibbs 2010).

Investigation into the effectiveness of formative feedback to directly shape teaching

Testing Principle 7 - Feedback provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape their teaching

(Juwah et al. 2004.)

Aims and objectives

The specific aims of this case study are to ascertain whether or not in instances where formative feedback is

used to directly shape the teaching it has;

• Increased the student's understanding of the subject

• Improved teaching on the module

• Met the individual learning styles of each student

• Provided an environment that facilitates them becoming independent learners

Background

I have observed that much of the learning I have engaged with on the PGCAP has influenced my perspective

on methods of teaching and has allowed for the integration of my learning and research with steps taken to

facilitate deeper learning by the students (UK PSF AoA 4&5). Much of the research on the subject of using

classroom assessment techniques acknowledges that 'Formative Classroom Assessment's purpose is to

improve the quality of student learning, not to provide evidence for evaluating or grading students. The

assessment is almost never graded and are almost always anonymous' (Angelo and Cross. 1990), therefore

information generated about the student learning can be used to directly adjust teaching to address any

gaps in not only subject matter, but also study skills and ability (Juwah et al. 2004), as well as providing

information to the students about their work.

Scale of Case Study

This case study has focuses on one module of the BA Hons Design Futures course. The module is an elected

module with a total of 8 students enrolled on it. The study was implemented to coincide with the start of the

PGCAP, so has been running since Oct 2011. The changes made to the module delivery methods, the

development of student evaluation forms and the analysis of findings after each stage of formative feedback

has been conducted in my own time with an aim of improving my teaching and to use the knowledge gained

on the PGCAP to inform my teaching practice (UK PSF AoA 5 & 6) and not as part of a programme level

investigation.

Investigation the effectiveness of using formative feedback to directly shape teaching

The module structure has traditionally been a 12 week taught programme of 7 lectures, 4 individual tutorials

evenly dispersed at weeks 3, 5, 8 & 10 and 1 guest speaker lecture in week 12. The module had 2

submissions, both written assignments of approximately 3000 words each, one at week 7 and one at week

12. The content is reviewed and updated every year prior to delivery, however the methods of delivery

remained essentially unchanged. During the revision process of last year’s module I decided that the

submission requirements would be changed to one written submission and the assignment would require a

greater level of independent investigation and enable students to engage with the subject matter in a more

personalised manner, thereby supporting independent learning and encouraging the development of an

attitude of responsibility towards their own learning (Gibbs 2010) (Stefani and Clarke 2000).

The module structure was changed during the course of the semester in response to issues identified during

the first few weeks of teaching after discussion with Chrissi Nerantzi, Lisa Thomas (Design Futures

Programme Leader) and my introduction to concepts dealing with student learning and individual needs

which were not previously considered when designing my module delivery methods (UK PSF AoA 5 & 6 / CK

3,4 & 5 / PV 1, 4 & 5). A concern that the delivered content was failing to sufficiently facilitate the student's

(successful) completion of the assignments was the motivation for this case study and decision to use

formative feedback as a method to influence the teaching on this module.

The final module structure delivered to the students consisted of;

Weeks 1 & 2 - Lectures as previously delivered in 2010 but with updated content.

Week 3 - Individual tutorials following the submission of a draft project proposal.

Week 4 - Set of 30 minute mini-lectures with brainstorming sessions to produce Mind-maps with discussion

after each mini-lecture.

Week 5 - Presentation of project proposals to class followed by peer and tutor assessment. Each

presentation and subsequent feedback session was videoed, then posted onto the VLE for students to view.

Week 6 - 50/50 Lecture followed by group activity based on delivered content.

Week 7 - Lecture as previously delivered in 2010 but with updated content.

Week 8 - Individual tutorials to discuss project progress (no draft reading).

Week 9 - PBL Session - with step by step guidance from tutor, concluding with evaluation of the learning

achieved against desired learning outcomes.

Week 10 - Presentation of project progress followed by peer and tutor assessment. Each presentation and

subsequent feedback session was recorded, then posted onto the VLE for students to view.

Week 11 - 50/50 Lecture and PBL session - format was designed in response to student evaluation of Week 9

PBL session.

Week 12 - Guest speaker/workshop session.

(All old/unaltered content shown in italics)

Evaluation

A questionnaire using a Likert scale was used to evaluate the success of these student centred and

interactive methods of delivering the content and the benefits to the students of gaining immediate

formative feedback from both their peers and tutor about their individual assignments. The evaluation forms

can be found in Appendix 1 and 2.

Student Presentations and Peer / Tutor Feedback - 2 sessions, total attendance over the 2sessions was total of10 students - 60% response rate

Table 1.

Student’s comments on the presentation and feedback session are listed in Appendix 3.

Number of times students accessed video and audio files of their personal feedback

Table 2.

5 Definitely agree 4 Mostly agree 3 Neither agree nor disagree 2 Mostly disagree 1 Definitely disagree N/A Not applicable 5 4 3 2 11. I understand the concepts explained in this module. 4 1 1 … …2. I understand the objectives of this session. 3 3 … … …3. Presenting my ideas helped me clarify my assignment objectives. 3 3 … … …4. Getting feedback from my peers helps my learning. 4 2 … … …5. There are enough additional resources to support my learning. 4 1 1 … …6. There is enough support from the lecturer 4 1 1 … …7. The lecturer is enthusiastic about what they are teaching. 5 1 … … …8. The lectures are intellectually stimulating. 5 1 … … …9. The lectures are too difficult for me to understand ... … ... 1 5Personal development 10. The lecture has helped me to present myself with confidence. 3 3 ... … …11. My communication skills have improved. 3 2 1 … …

12. As a result of the lecture, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems. 2 3 1 … …

Video Recordings Presentation Feedback

No of viewsNo of views

Student 1 2 3Student 2 3 2Student 3 9 12Student 4 5 13Student 5

Table 3.

Results of presentations and peer / tutor feedback evaluation forms, student comments and

viewings of feedback sessions

From the results gained from the evaluation forms from student presentations and the comments made the

following assessments can be made;

• 100% of students found it beneficial to present their project progress to the tutor and other students.

• 100% of students found it helped their understanding of their investigations to get formative feedback

from the tutor and their peers.

The students seemed to gain confidence and improve their communication skills in presenting their work

and also benefited from alternative points of view relating to their own established perspectives about their

work.

• 80% of students watched their initial presentation session and the video feedback from tutor and peers.

• A total of 49 viewings of the presentation sessions and the video feedback sessions were completed.

•40% of students listened to the audio recordings of their presentations and feedback sessions.

• A total of 4 listens of the audio recordings were completed.

Although not all students listened back to the recordings of video and audio feedback, most did and

therefore it can be assumed (by the multiple views) that it was beneficial to their understanding of their

projects.

There are also 2 other assumptions than can be made;

• The students much preferred the video feedback to the audio feedback.

• The formative feedback gained earlier on in the module (i.e. the video feedback) was much more helpful

to their investigations than the formative feedback received much nearer to the hand-in date of their

investigations (i.e. the audio feedback).

Audio Recordings No of listens

Student 1 2

Student 2 2

Student 3 0

Student 4 0

Student 5 0

Although these 2 statements appear to be in contrast with each other it is possible that they are both

applicable as each student has individual learning needs, preferences of the way in which they learn and also

the level of support they need even when they are all engaging in the same learning task (Cho and Forde

2001). In order to meet the needs of a diverse group of students it will be necessary for tutors to

acknowledge the individuality of the students and design the delivery of modules to meet these needs, as

Cho and Forde state; 'Faculty need to provide multiple methodologies for students to learn each new

subject or problem... University teachers can no longer function solely as authoritative theoretical experts

who dictate abstract concepts and problems to their students' (2001:89).

PBL Session - 1 session, attendance was total of 5 students - 80% response rate

Table 4.

Student’s comments on the PBL session are listed in Appendix 4

5 Definitely agree 4 Mostly agree 3 Neither agree nor disagree 2 Mostly disagree 1 Definitely disagree N/A Not applicable 5 4 3 2 1

1. I understand the concepts explained in this module. 4 … … … …

2. I feel this session has allowed for deeper learning than a traditional lecture. 3 ... … 1 …

3. Investigating the learning objectives in this way has helped me understand the content better. 1 2 1 … …

4. The PBL session has made me understand the subject of corporate identity 1 3 … … …

5. I feel there are areas of the subject I have not learnt enough about. … 2 … 2 …

6. There was enough guidance from the lecturer 1 2 1 … …

7. The lecturer is enthusiastic about what they are teaching 3 1

8. This session was intellectually stimulating. 3 1 … … …

9. The session makes the subject difficult for me to understand 1 1 2Personal development

10. The session has helped me to present myself with confidence. 2 1 1 … …

11. My communication skills have improved. 1 2 1 … …

12. As a result of the session, I feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems. 1 3 ... ...

Results of PBL session evaluation forms

From the results on the student evaluation forms of the PBL session the following assessments can be made:

• 100% of students felt they understood the subject being investigated, although this result could be

skewed by the previous year’s lectures given on (the subject of) corporate identity and image.

•75% of students felt the PBL structure allowed for deeper learning than a traditional lecture.

•25% of students felt the PBL structure did not allow for deeper learning than a traditional lecture.

Therefore this it can be assumed that although most students found the PBL session helped their learning,

some of the students felt that it was not beneficial to their learning. These findings are further reinforced by

the following results:

• 50% of students felt there were areas of the subject they had not learnt.

• 25% of students felt that the session format made it difficult to understand the subject.

It is also clear that the difference in the students’ abilities to take control of their own learning is quite varied

within even this small sample of students. Initially most of them seemed daunted by the PBL task although

some took on the challenge and ultimately benefitted from this alternative method of learning. However

those students who felt they had not really benefitted from the session were placed at a disadvantage. In

order to compensate for this, the subsequent PBL session in Week 11 was split with a more traditional

lecture style delivery of content relevant to the PBL activity that followed. This allowed for all the students to

engage with the learning without anyone benefitting more than another. Anecdotal evaluation gathered

from the students at the end of the Week 11 session showed that the majority of students (6 out of 7) felt

this had been the most successful of the delivered sessions, with only 1 student stating she still preferred the

traditional lecture style of delivering content.

As Gibbs (2010) states, students have different interpretations of what constitutes 'good teaching’. Some are

accustomed to taking responsibility over their own learning and some will expect a teacher to provide all the

content in lectures. Students can interpret good teaching in many ways, for example as increasing their

knowledge, as a teacher clarifying everything or as the teacher facilitating the students' own learning (Van

Rossum, Deijkers and Hamer 1985). Teachers need to take into account the different perceptions students

have regarding teaching it is their responsibility to facilitate the development of students into sophisticated

learners.

Effect on Aspects of Personal Development

In all cases various elements of personal development were also improved. The evaluation results also show

that both in the presentation and feedback sessions and the PBL sessions;

• 90% felt they had increased confidence in presenting their ideas.

• 80% felt they had improved their communication skills.

• 90% Felt more able to tackle unfamiliar problems.

There were no negative evaluations relating to personal development made against either session type with

the remaining students choosing "3-Neither agree nor disagree" to describe their feelings.

Conclusion

From the results it is clear that the benefit to the students in presenting their own investigations to the class

and receiving immediate feedback (supported by video/audio recordings available in their own time) is

significant, advantageous and benefits both their academic and personal development. This combined with a

mixture of traditional delivery methods, class discussions and PBL activities has encouraged them to develop

skills needed to develop a feeling of ownership and responsibility over their own learning (Stefani et al.

2000) and ultimately become will enable them to become 'sophisticated learners' (Gibbs 2010).

The formative feedback study has provided significant and varied information to the tutor about the

students in terms of;

• The student's understanding of their own individual investigations.

• The student's research process.

• The student's level of understanding of other students investigations.

• The student's understanding of the subject matter.

• The variety of students individual learning styles.

The formative feedback study has provided significant and varied information to the tutor about their

teaching in terms of;

• The tutor’s ability to effectively use feedback to improve their teaching practice.

• The tutor’s ability to meet the needs of a diverse range of student learning styles.

• The tutor’s ability to facilitate the student’s development by supporting independent learning.

These findings display the value of conducting this type of analysis and shows how 'the tools used for

evaluation of student learning should ideally be designed to ensure that not only does the teacher gain

insights into student learning but also such that the teacher should obtain useful insights into the

effectiveness of their teaching style or method' (Stefani, Clarke and Littlejohn 2000). It is also important to

remember that using formative feedback to inform teaching is a vital part of reflective practice and needs to

be conducted at regular intervals during module delivery. This benefits the student as it has been shown that

'on degree programmes where the volume of formative assessment is greater, students take a deep

approach to their studies to a greater extent' (Gibbs and Dunbar-Goddet 2007), and it benefits the tutor as

'frequent assessment tasks, especially diagnostic tests, can help teachers generate cumulative information

about students’ levels of understanding and skill so that they can adapt their teaching accordingly' (Juwah

et al. 2004).

Lessons learnt

This study shows that this particular cohort of students preferred to have elements of traditional teaching

i.e. lectures and PBL methods in the same session. This structure better meets the needs of all students as it

caters for diversity in the ability of students and learning styles.

Consideration must be given to inclusivity and accessibility. Design Management 3 is not an on-line module;

so it is important that the majority of learning and the facilitation of student learning is carried out in the

delivered sessions. Other elements that support learning such as additional support materials, audio and

video feedback and other methods must only support and not substitute the learning that takes place in the

delivered sessions.

The tutor is required to facilitate student's development into 'autonomous, independent and self-

motivated learners' (Stefani Clarke, Littlejohn. 2000), and maintain high levels of support that include all

students regardless of ability or specific learning preferences to enable their academic and personal

development.

Considering the evaluation received from this cohort I wouldn't conduct a 100% PBL session for delivery with

this group, but rather conduct a smaller PBL activity with other groups of students to gauge their response

prior to dedicating an entire session to a PBL activity. Consideration must be given to the needs of all

students and I feel this method adversely benefits those students who have engaged in responsibility of their

own learning at the detriment of other students.


In order to better evaluate the success of the changes made to the Design Management 3 module it would

be necessary to compare the results of the student's submitted work against the average of the previous

year’s results. As Gibbs (2010) states 'One of the most telling indicators of the quality of educational

outcomes is the work students submit for assessment, such as their final-year project or dissertation'.

Unfortunately this information is not presently available due to the timing of this case study, but should

certainly be considered at a later date.

A longitudinal study is needed with a greater number of students to test the reliability of the results of this

study. In order to improve the accuracy of the results in establishing the benefit students perceived to get

from the different kinds of formative feedback received throughout this module, I would have also needed

to get student evaluation on the individual tutorial sessions to establish comparison between the

presentation sessions with peer and tutor feedback and the more traditional individual tutorial sessions.

Better methods need to be established in order to get a higher percentage of student feedback and also

more immediate analysis of the data provided. The university has a quiz system that can be used for this

purpose, unfortunately due to the geographical location of the School of Art and Design this may not be a

viable solution if the devices can only be borrowed on a short-term loan. Alternatively there are various on-

line questionnaire sites that could provide this function, in particular ones that allow students to test results,

this could be effective provided students were not liable for the cost of the texts.

Arguably this kind of study can and should be incorporated into the teaching practice of tutors and that this

kind of reflective practice of one's own effectiveness as a facilitator of learning can only benefit students.

When classroom assessment is used to generate (immediate) feedback that both informs students' learning

and informs the teaching practice of teachers it creates a 'feedback loop' that becomes integrated into the

everyday classroom activities, with more usage 'the communications loop connecting faculty and students -

- and teaching and learning -- becomes more efficient and more effective' (Angelo and Cross . 1990).


•Angelo, T. and Cross, P. (1990), Classroom Assessment Techniques. Jossey Bass

•Gibbs, G. (2010), Dimensions of Quality. The Higher Education Academy.

•Gibbs, G. and Dunbar-Goddet, H . (2007), The effects of programme assessment environments on

student learning. Higher Education Academy.

• Juwah, C. Macfarlane, D.D. Matthew, B. Nicol, D. Ross, D. and Smith, B. (2004.), Enhancing student

learning through effective formative feedback. June, Issue: 68. The Higher Education Academy,

1-41.

•Cho, M. and Forde, E. (2001), Designing Teaching and Assessment Methods for Diverse Student

Populations. Journal of Art & Design Education, 20: 86-95.•Steadman, M. (1998), Using classroom assessment to change both learning and teaching. New Directions

for Teaching and Learning. 75: 23-35.

• Stefani, L.A.J. Clarke, J. Littlejohn, A.H. (2000), Developing a Student- Centred Approach to Reflective

Learning, Innovations in Education & Training International, 37:2, 163-171.

• Van Rossum, E .J., Deijkers, R . and Hamer, R . (1985), Students’ learning conceptions and their

interpretation of significant educational concepts. Higher Education. 14 (6), pp617-641.

• Yorke, M. (2003) Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement

of pedagogic practice. Higher Education 45 (4), 477-501.

Appendix 1:

Student feedback 5 Definitely agree4 Mostly agree

(adapted from National Student Survey 3 Neither agree nor disagree2005 Questionnaire) 2 Mostly disagree

1 Definitely disagreeN/A Not applicable

The teaching in this lecture

1. I understand the conceptsexplained in this module.

2. I understand theobjectives of this session.

3. Presenting my ideashelped me clarify myassignment objectives.

4. Getting feedback from mypeers helps my learning.

5. There are enoughadditional resources tosupport my learning.

6. There is enough supportfrom the lecturer

7. The lecturer is enthusiasticabout what they are

teaching.

8. The lectures areintellectually stimulating.

9. The lectures are toodifficult for me to

understand

Personal development

10. The lecture has helped meto present myself with

confidence.

11. My communication skillshave improved.

12. As a result of the lecture, Ifeel confident in tackling

unfamiliar problems.

Other comments

5 4 3 2 1

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

Appendix 2:

Student feedback about PBL session 5 Definitely agreeon Corporate Identity and Corporate Image 4 Mostly agree

3 Neither agree nor disagree(adapted from National Student Survey 2 Mostly disagree2005 Questionnaire) 1 Definitely disagree

N/A Not applicable

The teaching in this lecture

1. I understand the conceptsexplained in this module.

2. I feel this session hasallowed for deeper learningthan a traditional lecture.

3. Investigating the learningobjectives in this way hashelped me understand thecontent better.

4. The PBL session has mademe understand the subjectof corporate identity

4. I feel there are areas ofthe subject I have not learntenough about.

6. There was enoughguidance from the lecturer

7. The lecturer is enthusiasticabout what they are

teaching.

8. This session wasintellectually stimulating.

9. The session makes thesubject difficult for me tounderstand

Personal development

10. The session has helped meto present myself with

confidence.

11. My communication skillshave improved.

12. As a result of the session, Ifeel confident in tackling

unfamiliar problems.

Other comments

5 4 3 2 1

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … … …

… … … …

… … … …

… … … …

… … … …

Appendix 3:

Student’s comments on the presentation and feedback session;

"The class presentations are a great way to prepare for the future. Communication is key and group sessions are ideal to improve

ours.

The lectures are always helpful and presented very well and interesting. They are not just talking, there are always visuals on screens

too. I have learnt a great deal in this module and am enjoying the investigation assignment."

"There were some issues and limits we hit which were sound levels. I think a Dictaphone on the table would have had the same

effect but possibly made people feel a bit less intimidated by the camera."

"I feel presenting in front of the class is useful because talking about your investigation helps you clarify what parts you are missing.

Its also really useful to hear fresh ideas from students. After working on the investigation for months, its useful to get someone else's

insight. Especially as sometimes you’ve missed something really obvious. I found it interesting to hear the process that the other

students had undergone. Its useful to hear different ways of tackling an investigation."

Appendix 4:

Student’s comments on the PBL session;

"that session was good. I enjoyed the group work and being able to work on your own and take ownership for your own bit of

knowledge which you have to feed back into the group.

I liked the summary you gave at the end which tied in all the differences, positives and negatives of the way we did it."

"At the start of the lesson when Fiona presented the task, it seemed quite daunting. I felt it was going to be tough task. However as

the session progressed I began to enjoy it more and more. As soon as we started to get involved, it was a lot more interesting than I

had initially predicted. Having to explore the subject matter ourselves made the learning immediate! I felt I understood the topic

because it was in our own terms, rather than a lecture. It also allowed us to put the topic into context which makes the content to

stick a lot better. On the other hand, I feel for students who are not as confident, this style of lecture may be worrying. A few people

in my group voiced at the start they did not like speaking in front of the class. However, taking part in these experiences will only

improve on that skill which will be invaluable for the future. Overall, I feel the session was planned thoroughly and a lot of effort had

been put into it. The timing ran really well, and I felt each section had just the right amount of time. I left the class feeling I had learnt

a lot and had got to know some of the students I hadn't really talked to before. Even though some topics will always suit the ‘lecture

style session’, some sessions can definitely benefit from a set up like the session today."

"This session allowed me to interact better with other students which helped me develop my knowledge through their

understanding of the subject as well as my own.

Allowing me to complete my own research in class helped me to understand the subject in my own way helping me to grasp

a

deeper understanding of the subject area. "

Final Conclusion

In order to provide a comparison of the methods used by group the main benefits of each method used and

the limitations of each method are displayed in Table 1.

Group member Formative Feedback Method

Benefits of the method Limitations (if any)

John Peer-verbal, Tutor-verbal

Giving/receiving in-class peer verbal feedback facilitated coaching and technique

Regular in-class self-assessment (reflection) facilitated coaching and technique

The majority of students think that they will continue to give/receive in-class peer verbal feedback and self-assess (reflect) for their continuing professional development

Allows teachers to become facilitators rather than dictators of student learning

Provides teachers with a method of assessing understanding during each session

Enables a greater amount of content to be delivered during each session

Provides teachers with opportunities to create dialogue around the topic areas

When first introduced, some students took time to effectively engage and feel comfortable with giving and receiving peer verbal feedback and regularly reflecting

Udayangani Verbal Interactive nature of the subject Improve understanding of the subject

matter Effective feedback discussions leading

to previous and current lecture Effective feedback discussions leading

to overall subject matter Anonymously of providing answers to

questions Evaluating students’ position in terms

of the overall class performance Provide opportunity for the teacher

to create dialogue around the subject matter

Provide feedback on the student understanding

Provide feedback on the level of understanding of different students (PT and FT)

Technical difficulties when running the system

Time taken by the Qwizdom session that can be used to teach more subject content

Table 1. Comparison of the methods used within the group

Below is a brief summary of the main findings from each case study and the observational work conducted

by Caroline, which highlights the benefits of each feedback principle on student learning and identifies issues

related to equality, diversity, inclusivity and accessibility.

1. Facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning

Benefits to student learning:

• Facilitates independent learning

• Enables students to judge their progression towards goals

• Creates an inclusive learning environment

Issues related to equality, diversity, inclusivity and accessibility:

Self-assessment is considered to be an evolution towards a more inclusive democratic learning environment

(Somervell, 1993; Dearing, 1997) as it promotes greater equality of power between teachers and students

(Taras, 2008), which has been shown to enhance student learning (Black and William, 1998; Nicol and

Fabrizio Oral and Written

Lead to detailed feedback discussion

Enhance understanding of overall subject matter through motivation and self-esteem

Improve students’ subsequent interest in learning and performance

Provide opportunity for the teacher to exchange views

Provide feedback on student understanding

Provide feedback on the level of understanding of individual students

Combining verbal and written feedback takes time

Students might not be willing to receive feedback twice

Fiona Peer-verbal, Tutor-verbalAudio

Provides significant and varied information to the tutor about the students in terms of; The student's understanding of their

own individual investigations, research process, level of understanding of other students investigations. The students understanding of the subject matter and variety of individual learning styles.

Provides significant and varied information to the tutor about their teaching in terms of; The tutor’s ability to effectively use

feedback to improve their teaching practice, their ability to meet the needs of a diverse range of student learning styles and ability to facilitate the students development by supporting independent learning.

Only provides information about a specific group or individual students in terms of learning style and level of subject understanding .

Can be time consuming when beginning the process of evaluation and data gathering.

Must be an ongoing process to be effective.

Table 1. Comparison of the methods used within the group

Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). It is also postulated that self-assessment provides inclusivity among students from

any level and/or stage of the assessment process (Taras, 2008).

2. Encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning:


• Creates effective dialogue between learners and teachers regarding the subject matter

• Increases student engagement during the class

• Allows the incorporation of technologies for teaching


There are learners with different requirements such as difficulty of hearing, understanding, concentrating,

communicating with others, accessing text, and learners with dyslexia. Feedback provided during the

Qwizdom session was accessible to all due to the visibility of the illustrated answers in the power-point

slides and engagement with the dialogue created around the questions. Unlike written feedback that might

not favourable to dyslexic students, the discussions created around the Qwizdom questions and answers are

helpful to all students. Apart from the formative feedback sessions using Qwizdom, the module is also

supplemented with an online test to provide feedback for students. These diverse methods of formative

feedback methods improve equality and diversity of learning for students.

3. Helps clarify what is (goals, criteria, expected standards)


• It is vital that the students understand what is expected of them


6. Encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem:


• Leads to detailed feedback discussions

• Enhances student understanding

• Improves students’ interest in learning


Combining oral and written feedback means that students who have a tendency to compare themselves

against others - rather than to focus on the difficulties in the task - will have less chance to do so. Further

students’ feedback becomes more inclusive and accessible as two different means are used.

7. Provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching:


• Provides individual information about the specific needs of a particular group of students rather

than generic information that can be applied to any other group of students

• Is a vital part of reflective practice and using formative feedback to enhance student learning that

needs to be conducted at regular intervals during module delivery

• Needs to be done so that information gathering and data analysis can be done quickly and

effectively


The variety of assessment techniques and feedback methods described in the case study, such as students

presentations and group discussions, peer feedback, video and audio feedback provide ever-more diverse

student populations support to their learning. It allows teachers to adapt their teaching in a way that can

optimise student learning and academic achievement (Cho and Forde 2001). Providing feedback in a variety

of formats addresses issues relating to inclusivity and accessibility as these methods don’t exclude students

with learning difficulties, problems with reading and understanding information and those that simply want

the ability to refer back to feedback and discussion about their work.

Future directions

Future work should be conducted in order to investigate the benefits of the two principles of good feedback

practice which were not investigated within the current case studies. These were that good feedback

practice should: “provide opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance” and

“deliver high quality information to students about their learning”.

assessment and feedback study group project

Education

methods feedback

specific feedback

formative feedback methods

verbal formative feedback

summative feedback

class peer feedback

class peer verbal feedback

selfassessment of learning