Presentation on theme: "Maximising feedback opportunities Lyndsey Welch – Lecturer and ILT Coordinator in Sport, Exercise and Fitness Maximising the use of Mahara and TURNITIN."— Presentation transcript:
Maximising feedback opportunities Lyndsey Welch – Lecturer and ILT Coordinator in Sport, Exercise and Fitness Maximising the use of Mahara and TURNITIN to encourage innovative and high quality online feedback.
Session overview To introduce the potential of technologies namely TURNITIN and Mahara to maximise both formative and summative feedback quality and opportunities Case studies: - To share ideas on how Loughborough College have used these technologies To discuss current and potential uses of such tools in different sectors To summarise potential institutional and pedagogical affordances To offer insight into the other things to consider Aim
Good feedback The seven principles of good feedback (Nicol and MacFarlane-Dick 2006) helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, expected standards) facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning delivers high quality information to students about their learning encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem provides opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
What is TURNITIN? www.submit.ac.uk Online submission, plagiarism checker and grading tool Excellent assignment management tool Integration options; Blackboard, Blackboard CE/Vista, Moodle, ANGEL, and Desire2Learn. TURNITIN UK All HE assignments For all suitable file types Full process How it has been used?TURNITIN
Feedback on TURNITIN Strengths of feedback capability Things to be aware of Ability to have pre-set quick marks and comments Consistency across markers Directive feedback possible Plagiarism checker Better grading/expectations through custom rubrics All features sit within the same upload system – submission, plagiarism, grading, feedback for students Depends on the version Limited formatting Cannot attach a file present No formal IV process/log in Doesnt check spg Weaknesses of feedback capability Basic plug in available for Moodle 2.0. Different benefits of new/old version Old version likely to stay until Sept 2012 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Peermark on TURNITIN Opportunity for both formative summative feedback Many ways to assign papers Peer support Saves tutor time Can be anonymous Offers same platform as tutor marking Can extend to other type of resources e.g. reviewing a Journal paper. reviewing a Journal paper Strengths Students reluctant to share work Slightly confusing to set up Student still expect tutor review Weaknesses Things to be aware of Nb: Currently no available plug in for Moodle 2.0 that incorporates PeerMark. It is however in development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Mahara What is Mahara? Student centred e-portfolio system Learners and staff can use Mahara to demonstrate their learning, skills and development and record their achievements over time to a selected audience.
Mahara – case study 1 Reflective blogs Period of extensive staff development as part of LSIS bid Reflective process over 6-7 weeks Technology expert supported process by commenting on reflection offering ways to move forward. Other examples Further work Employability skills – blog of skill development Professional development for students Building criteria into the assessment grading grid to promote reflection Ways to build two way dialogue Example 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Mahara – case study 2 Supporting student work Used to support 1 st time pass rates on Higher National Diploma. Final outcome – students to submit 4 views on different topics. Student share view with tutors Tutors give intermediate feedback on at least one occasion Students submit final assignment Extending this provision across other HND units Encouraging more formative feedback in other modules Example Future work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Other uses of Mahara for feedback Wiki type activities - getting small groups to work on developing a webpage on a certain topic. Then students can peer review each others work and post feedback. Group work/Peer reviews Things to be aware of Feedback is private by default, but can be made public. The owner of the content can then make it private – but this cant be changed back once done. Once left, feedback cant be deleted/edited by the owner of the view/blog or by the leaver of the feedback – it can only be made private. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Discussion – enhancing feedback practices Small groups How could these be used to improve your current feedback practices? If you are already using it how does it improve your practice? How do they compare to other tools you use? Share other good practice Feedback One example of either from each group
-More timely and accessible feedback – enhance reflection -More private feedback -Access to potentially more feedback from a range of sources -Online feedback improves common issues such as illegibility of writing and gives options for student to increase size of font etc… -Directive feedback -More opportunity to reflect Possible pedagogical benefits
Possible institutional benefits Efficiency The potential of peer feedback reduces the pressures on staff time. Reduces the need for admin support collating assignments/returning assignments to students More flexible access to assignments for marking Consistency Quickmarks in TURNITIN – can be pre loaded Rubrics for grading grids Open access to view other tutors marking – also means more effective monitoring and allowing interventions Template views can be set up in Mahara
Final thoughts – practical application Other tools – Quia/Hot Potatoes/VLE software Institutional and pedagogical aims Platform differences Automated vs. manual options Version differences Cohort sizes/type: cost-benefit analysis Polices/procedures
Questions and contact details Questions Contact details Lyndsey Welch Loughborough College Radmoor Road Le11 3bt Email: Lyndsey.email@example.comLyndsey.firstname.lastname@example.org
References/useful paper References Other interesting papers on this topic Nicol, D. 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): pp. 199-218. Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J. and O'Donovan, B. (2010). Feedback: all that effort but what is the effect? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 35(3): pp. 277-289. Rolfe, V. (2010). Can Turnitin be used to provide instant formative feedback? British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01091. Shortis, M. and Burrows, S. (2009). A review of the status of online, semi-automated marking and feedback systems. Proceedings of: ATN Assessment Conference 2009: Assessment in Different Dimensions. Melbourne, Australia, pp. 302-312. Yorke, J., Gibson, W. and Wilkinson, H. (2010). Towards sustainable marking practises and improved quality of feedback in short-answer assessments. ATN Assessment Conference. Sydney, Australia.