How to mark 100 assignments and give feedback in an hour

Seb SavoryUCL Electronic & Electrical Engineering

Optical Networks

2 of 22

The problem

• Engineering mathematics benefits from students carrying out regular assignments to test their understanding of lecture material

• Given the cumulative nature of the topics near instant feedback is desirable, since one needs to have mastered one topic before progressing to the next

• In 2007/08, moved from 20% of marks from a mid-sessional test to 20% of the final mark obtained from assignments with each assignment worth 2-3% of final exam

Optical Networks

3 of 22

Possible solutions

• Use computer based marking– Generally needs multiple choice questions– Not explored, for three reasons

• At present we can only check the final answer, not the method and explanation/assumptions which often are as important

• We want to encourage the “engineering disciplinarity” which starts with rough sketch etc.

• When we started it was in 2007 – pre-moodle @ UCL

• Use academics to mark assignment– Staff time per 0.5CU increased by ~ 300% - not practical

• Use PhD students / postdocs– Used this from when assignments first introduced in

2007/08, but turnaround is variable (two weeks)

Optical Networks

4 of 22

Proposed solution

• Parallel processing - peer marking– Get students to mark each others assignments in

lectures– Can thus provide rapid feedback

• During a lecture the model solutions are presented by the lecturer, including the mark scheme and students mark (and also provide comments), on their peers scripts

Optical Networks

5 of 22

Implementation – 1st iteration (2008/09)

• Submission– Students submit their assignments to departmental office

by a fixed deadline– Record of submissions noted

• Peer marking (for 5 out of 10 assignments)– Students collected an assignment (but not their own) at

the start of the lecture– Incentive to attend: Students required to attend a peer

marking session to get full marks• Even though students were advised that their marks would be

halved if they failed to attend the peer marking session, some failed to attend

• Mismatch results in some assignments still needing to be marked

Optical Networks

6 of 22

Implementation – 2nd iteration (2010/11)

• Combine submission deadline and peer marking (for 5 out of 10 assignments)– Students arrive for the lecture, then swap with a

neighbour– Peer markings ensues– Marked script is returned to the student by the marker– Student returns marked script to the lecturer

• Script marking checked by lecturer and also compared to marks for PhD marked assignments– No variation found to occur

Optical Networks

7 of 22

Implementation – 3rd iteration (2012/13)

• All assignments peer marked– As per the 2nd iteration, students bring assignments to

lectures and then swap with a neighbour– Number of assignments reduced to 7 (3 first term and 4

second term, to reduce competition with other work)– Will review and possibly reduce to 6 next year

• Current arrangement this term (2 lectures per week)

• Lecture• Lecture (assignment given)• Lecture• Peer marking

– And then repeats..

Optical Networks

8 of 22

Issues with peer marking

• Latecomers can be highly disruptive– Solution is to have a very clear set of rules

• Students sometimes struggle with marking their peers work, particularly when it is poorly presented or contains errors– This is useful in that it highlights to students the

importance of presenting clear solutions– Often if it contains errors, markers will highlight the error

and what should have been done on the marked script

Optical Networks

9 of 22

“The rules” – emailed the day before..

• Name and tutor's name to appears on front page of stapled solutions (marks deduced for failing to do so)

• Peer marking begins at 1005 precisely. Latecomers will get zero for all questions which have been peer marked (essential to avoid disruption of latecomers)

• Failure to attend fail will forfeit the marks for the assignment (with a few exceptions)– For anticipated absence solutions must be submitted in

advance (either physically or via email)– A doctors note can be produced for illness– Newsworthy/catastrophic problems with public transport

which can external be verified via TfL or train websites

Optical Networks

10 of 22

Draconian but necessary

• While these rules might seem excessive, latecomers are so disruptive to the lecture that this is necessary– When someone late arrives, I halt the peer marking, then

write on their script the questions for which solutions have been given out, then continue with the peer marking

– Peer marking session 1: Two latecomers– Peer marking session 2: No latecomers

Optical Networks

11 of 22

Final thoughts and observations

• Assignments encourage students to engage with lecture material and will work disproportionally hard to get 2-3%

• Submission at peer marking session and swapping with a neighbour works well

• For peer marking assignments should be short enough to be marked in 40 minutes, allowing for 5 minutes at the start and end of a lecture to perform the necessary admin.

• Peer marking encourages attendance at a tutorial session where students have to sit through seeing ideal solutions presented, getting feedback within the hour..

Optical Networks

12 of 22

Questions