Feedback on Assessment: Developing a Practitioner Handbook
Mr. Michael John Hammond
Research and Development Manager: Dudley College
Introduction
This paper is a continuation of the research carried out within six West Midlands Colleges into professional practice in feedback on assessment work on sub-degree (mainly HND) courses of higher education, in Further Education Colleges. The first part of this research has already been published on education-line, see Hammond (2002). As a result of that research, the Colleges consortium in conjunction with the University of Wolverhampton Collaborative Learning and Teaching Strategy group, were able to access further funding from HECFE, with a view to undertaking research to produce a handbook on good practice for academic staff, written by academic staff. Having considered the methodology, and the application of the handbook, the remainder of this paper is taken up with the conference data collection tool, and handbook itself, as this contains the research data collected during the project.
Methodology
In producing this research, the researcher sought to place the research within the reflective practitioner paradigm described by Donald Schon [Schon (1987)]. Staff from a number of FE Colleges in the West-Midlands were invited to a half- day working conference, where they were encouraged to reflect on their practice within small mixed College groups using a pre-prepared question sheet, prepared by the researcher on what they felt was the purpose of feedback, and what constituted good practice when feeding back on assessment to students. The practitioners were also asked to consider how various methods of feedback might be used, for example written, oral, electronic etc. As part of the design of the handbook, an appendix of all contributions made by practitioner groups and individuals was included, to enable staff using the handbook to be able to reflect on what was said, beyond the main edited text of the handbook. This allowed practitioners to stimulate further thinking on the subject, without the encumbrance of the researchers editing and interpretation of the data if they wished. The researcher couched the language of the handbook in a none academic format, while at the same time seeking not to be patronising, with a view to facilitating maximum use by practitioners of the handbook for whom it was designed rather than a purely academic audience.
Application of the Handbook
The handbook has been used extensively in one FE College, as part of the City and Guilds London Institute 7307 teacher-training course, where it has been well received. The handbook has also been given out to academic staff for reference purposes in other Colleges, in the way that was intended by the researcher and management in the Colleges, when the research commenced.
References
Hammond. M.J. (2002) Undertaking Action Research on Assessment Feedback within a Group of West Midlands Further Education Colleges Education-line Leeds, University of Leeds.
Schon, D. (1987) Education the Reflective Practitioner San-Francisco, Jossey-Bass
Conference Data Collection Tool
Assessment Feedback Conference Participant Question Sheet
Participant Guidelines
Thank you for attending this part of the conference. This is the most important part of the work that we are doing today. The purpose of this session, is to allow practitioners to come together and to debate the issues surrounding assessment feedback and what it is, and what is good feedback, and what is not so good feedback? Once the data from this session has been collated, it will be processed and edited into the form of a guide for staff to use within all the participant Colleges.
Participants should note that these sessions are carried out in strict accordance with the rules of academic freedom. The conference leaders and delegates will treat all data in strict confidence, and no data from this session should be divulged outside the session. Thank you for your co-operation in this matter.
You have been placed in small groups, with a view to arriving at the answers to the questions below. Time is very tight, and therefore it would be useful if you could develop some debate on the questions as set before engaging on other issues of interest to the group. A member of each group will be asked to feed back at the end of the session on one key point. Flipcharts and pens etc will be provided for use in this exercise.
Questions/Issue
Written Feedback
- What do you think should be contained in good written feedback?
Oral Feedback
- Do you think that oral feedback is a useful tool in feedback?
- If so, what should oral feedback contain?
- How do you think oral feedback, could be backed up in other ways?
Electronic Feedback
- What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of electronic feedback, and how could it be developed?
- If so, what would they contain?
Feedback through Self Assessment/Peer Assessment
- What constitutes good feedback, in self-assessment?
- What constitutes good feedback, in peer assessment?
Timing of Feedback
- How important is timing in feedback?
10. How would you define good timing in feedback?
General
11. What other issues not covered in the questions is important in producing good feedback?
Feed-Back on Assessment
Handbook
Introduction
This handbook came out of practitioner based action research, which was part of a conference organised by West Midlands Colleges, and the University of Wolverhampton. The purpose of the conference being to investigate feedback on assessment work for HE level courses, which are currently being delivered in FE Colleges in the West Midlands, although this handbook may equally be of value for staff undertaking teaching at all levels within Colleges and Universities.
This handbook was created out of the data that learning action sets formulated on the day of the conference produced for the West Midlands
Action Research Set, and the research and development manager at Dudley College.
How to use this Handbook
This handbook is aimed at teaching staff primarily in FE Colleges who are teaching higher level HNC and HND programmes of study. However, it might be of interest to teachers and lecturers at all levels within organisations. It is different, in that it seeks to create theory from practice, rather than it is argued more conventional methods of research, which seek to produce a theory to inform practitioners. This handbook therefore contains no external theory at all. It is comprised of the ethnographical experiences of the participants of the conference, and represents, as closely as possible their collective views on what constitutes good feedback on assessment. Thus it might be argued, that this handbook represents the practitioners revenge on the theorists.
This handbook comprises of two distinct parts, the body of the text, and the appendixes. The appendixes contain the views of the practitioners, as they were written down, either on ‘postit’ notes, or on a flipchart. Thus you the reader are able to sample exactly what was said, and draw your own conclusions, or disagree with the editor/author of this handbook. Agreeing with the author/editor of this handbook is not mandatory for you to get something from it. The body of the text, as intimated seeks to edit and present in a way that is logical and informative (hopefully!) what actually happened on that day. The author/editor would like to thank all the participants at the conference for their participation, and I hope they and you the reader find this work interesting and informative.
What is the purpose of Feedback?
One of the key questions that we considered was , “What is the purpose of feedback?” The question posed by the researcher suggests that there is only one purpose for feedback on assessment, or assessed work. However it is argued, that when you think about it, there are far more.
Confidence Building: Feedback can be used to give encouragement to students, to help them to strive to further improve their work in the future.
Performance Improvement: Feedback can be used to provide individuals with information on how performance improvement can be implemented, and improvement plans produced.
Identify strengths and weaknesses: To enable the students to identify their strengths and weaknesses within the module/task set.
Correction: Correct errors, and point out to students information that they might have missed.
Feedback to aid intellectual achievement: where feedback is the assessment of outcomes generated through undertaking assignments, students build their intellectual achievement on the foundations of feedback.
Achievement: give students an idea of how well they have achieved
Clarification and accountability: where feedback is used to demonstrate/clarify how a specific grade was reached- accountability.
Student experience: where feedback can be seen to enhance the quality of student educational experiences.
However, as one delegate stated of feedback (which it is argued gives justification for this guide): Qualitative only works well if done correctly. Bad feedback is worse than no feedback!
Having therefore if not concisely defined the reasoning for good feedback, but given a general range of views that you may like to add your own to. It is necessary now to consider how to build and integrate these definitions or purposes into a whole, taking into account issues such as the types of feedback. When giving feedback on assessment it is possible for us to use a number and range of diverse methods. It is now proposed to look at these in some more detail, and individually to see what our practitioners felt constituted good feedback, in that area.
Written Feedback
What makes good written feedback? Loads of red pen and sarcastic comments? Well, the practitioners recommend that all written feedback should be produced with a view to encouraging students and being supportive, offering praise, and constructivecriticism. This is particularly true, where the group you are working with (as many HND students are i.e. mature people returning to learning) is or has a high number of non standard entry students. Examples of being supportive and encouraging to these kinds of students’, might involve things such as encouraging drafts of work before final submission. Also, talking to students on a one to one tutorial basis about their concerns about the assessed work both before they submit the work, and after it has been marked, to enable them to understand and plan where they need to make improvements etc.
One group of practitioners recommended that in providing feedback one adopts (where possible) a positive comment on the work, followed by a constructively critical comment on the work, then back to a positive comment on the work. Where assignment comments are made on a front sheet, practitioners also felt that students would find annotated notes on the scripts useful as well.
Remember the dreaded red pen from your days at School, College and/or University? Red pen is out, try to use a pencil as many of the practitioners felt that red pen was too aggressive and negative. The amount of feedback given on work may also change over time, as students progress in their courses, so you might wish to give more feedback on the work at the beginning of a student’s course, and less at the end, as the student’s academic style develops.
Do you correct spelling mistakes? Well one group of practitioners thought that it was a good idea to comment on common skills. They also felt that it was a good idea for the assessor to watch their (the assessor’s) spelling and punctuation (ouch!) as well, and this might be achieved best if the work was typed.
Some practitioners also felt that as part of the feedback process, thought might be given to allow students space to comment on the time that they had spent on the assignment, and problems they had encountered. All the practitioner groups pointed to the need to develop a Proforma (these are now usually standard in any case) for the feedback to be given on, which should contain the grade or percentage etc.
Written feedback on assessment is probably the oldest and most traditional of feedback methods, and the one most academics used most frequently by convention. However there are other methods of feedback, which can be used in conjunction with or possibly instead of written feedback, e.g. oral feedback.
Oral Feedback
Oral feedback can be used as a feedback tool; it can be given either to individuals, or to groups. If used sensitively with students, i.e. as a two way process of communication, then oral feedback can be an effective teaching tool. It can be used as part of tutorial sessions, and many practitioners found that could be used frequently in the classroom setting to great effect, again particularly with non-traditional entry students as a method of encouragement. Also, oral feedback can be seen as an instantaneous form of communication, which in visual subjects such as Art and Design, and Clinical Studies etc was thought by practitioners to be a useful tool in the teaching and learning process.
The practitioners also recommend that oral feedback be linked to written feedback, and they felt it was advisable to ‘back up’ written feedback with oral feedback, when returning assessments to students. In addition, the practitioners felt that oral feedback could be linked to the pastoral systems within the College, as well as to the exam board reviews and examples of good work. There was also a feeling, that oral feedback must be a precursor to, and overlap any disciplinary systems in the College. The practitioners also felt that oral feedback could be used in conjunction with examples of good assignment work, to give students an idea of standards required for high marks etc.
Although considered later in this handbook, many practitioners sought to relate oral feedback to peer assessment/ peer review, which could involve forums of staff and students as a classroom activity. However one group of practitioners warned that an exercise of this type requires the lecturer to have a high level of skills which may need to be developed using staff development training. “Don’t try this at home, unless you know what you are doing”, was the suggestion made.
Electronic Feedback
Learning via ICT and the internet, is the new hot topic within education, given the Government’s emphasis on “learndirect” and the development by many Colleges of ILT provision. In future many more academic staff may be required to communicate with students at a distance. However, triangulating evidence from part 1 of this assignment from primary research of both staff and students, there is a marked reluctance to engage in this process, because of the impersonal nature of electronic communication; [See Hammond (2002)]. Replying via e-mail was also felt to be more time consuming by some practitioners, although others felt that it could be a more economical use of staff time. It is suggested that this might have something to do with the overall method of curriculum delivery, although practical factors such as typing speed of course may play a significant part in this! There were also concerns from practitioners that the system might fail, or be vulnerable to from hacking in certain instances.
However some practitioners did reflect on some of the benefits of electronic feedback, and concluded that it might be easier to analyse, and faster to get out. But there remains the issue of checking that the students have understood the issues, which might be made more difficult without the human interaction, which is not of course directly present with electronic feedback.
Also, some practitioners considered that electronic feedback would be useful for part time/distance learning students. They felt also that it was useful for whole group interaction through on-line learning, although this methodology should be used for the whole group or none, through learning on line. This, they concluded, would create feedback, which would then not involve written comments on the work, with all feedback being sent electronically. However, the same group of practitioners felt that to replicate a more human response within the process, the medium of video conferencing, for whole group learning might be a useful tool to utilise.
Self Assessment
Within the context of Self-Assessment, there are a number of issues that the practitioners were concerned about. Firstly they felt that students make themselves vulnerable by assessing themselves, and thus it was important for staff, in framing questions, to make sure that they will be guided to useful answers, and be matched to the criteria that is being assessed. Thus, they concluded, it is important that students understand the importance of the process. Other practitioners felt that students who are reflective comment on assignments before assessments are given out, and thus reflective (assessed) diaries might form part of the self-assessment process in these cases. This group of practitioners then mused upon the question of whether a student asking for help, is actually a form of self assessment or not, as they are flagging up the fact both to themselves and to their tutor that they do not understand something.