1. Enhancing student feedback through digital audio technology; an evaluation of staff & student experience Derek France (d.france@chester.ac.uk)d.france@chester.ac.uk Kenny Lynch (klynch@glos.ac.uk)klynch@glos.ac.uk GEES NSS Conference Manchester November 2010

2. Assessment – central to the student experience: frames learning, creates learning activity and orients all aspects of learning behaviour (Gibbs, 2006, 23). Feedback – central to learning from assessment: feedback quantity and quality are the probably the most important factors in enhancing students learning (Race, 1999, 27). However: the literature on student experiences of feedback tells a sorry tale (Handley et al, 2007, 1). many students commented on cryptic feedback which often posed questions, but gave no indication of where they went wrong (GfK, 2008, 8) Brief context: assessment and feedback

3. Provisional sector results 2009+2010 (Full time totals)

5. Greater focus on technology will produce real benefits for all (Department of Education and Skills, UK, 2005, p.2) HEFCE, UK (2009, p.6) more cautiously states that,focus should be on student learning rather than on developments in technology per se, enabling students to learn through, and be supported by technology Prensky (2009) now advocates Digital Wisdom and Digital Enhancement Brief Context: Literature

6. Model 1: Support Lectures Model 2: Support Fieldwork Model 5: Assessment Tool Screencasting, podcating lectures Lecture summaries Pre-lecture listening materials (complex concepts) iWalk: Location-based information Instruction on technique & equipment use Video footage prepare for field trip Model 4: Support Practical-based Learning Model 3: Support 3-Dimensional Learning Model 6: Provide Feedback Lecture recordings Digital Story-telling Anatomical Specimens (Structures, tissues, dissections) Software teaching & learning (replace text-based instructions) Student-created podcast based on field trips Student-created podcast to address climate change Model 7: Supplement Lectures Bring topical issues Guidance & tips Assessment tasks Supplement Online teaching Skills Development Models of Podcasting (Nie, 2007)

7. Chester examples

8. One year, 2008 – 2009: Two modules – Level 4 (69 students); Level 6 (34 students). One formative and summative assessment exercises (L6) & four generic large group feedback opportunities (L4). For each assignment: Summative (Sm) -generic overview commentary combined with bespoke feedback on the group presentation Formative (Fm) - informal podcast based on the e-postcard Sm and Fm sent to the feedback section of each students VLE-based e-portfolio Larger group generic feedback of four coursework assessments and placed in the online module space. The case study

9. Feedback portal within the institutional VLE Upload via modular e-learning areas Feedback Uploading & Tracking

10. Formative Feedback N = 87 by Wordle.net

11. Summative Feedback N = 87

12. Generic Large Group Feedback N = 90

13. Gloucestershire examples

14. Project aims GEES-funded small project November 2008 – March 2009, with the aims to: develop a straightforward procedure for creating and delivering audio feedback; follow a group of academics through the process of introducing audio feedback in a range of modules; and evaluate the experience

15. Project members Bill Burford (Landscape) James Kirwan (CCRI) Dave Milan (Geography) Chris Short (Geography) Claire Simmons (Broadcast Journalism) Elisabeth Skinner (Community Development) Alan Howe (Social Work)

16. Staff responses and Issues Initially added to workload, but as become used to it, generally perceived as neutral [maximum?] Initial concern about content preparation, led to scripting, but gradually moved towards notes/marking sheets and spontaneous recording [skill development and confidence] Concerns about accuracy of delivery – mistakes were made in sending to students Need for careful management of the medium – tone of voice, intimacy, trust Quality – FASQ, mark moderating Security, privacy & identity – misdirected files, archive, anonymous marking, team-based feedback Handling grades – on recording or on work? Embedding in practice - 12 months later staff still using the technologies

17. More personalised: This feedback felt that the work had really been looked at and evaluated personally. I listened to this at home and it felt like you were in the room with me and I wasnt totally comfortable with that. More understandable? You get the tone of voice with the words so you could understand the importance of the different bits of feedback. Responsiveness to receiving information verbally: Dont just briefly read it, you actually listen to it and take it in. Better, goes in more. Can remember feedback from podcast but not from written. Greater sensitivity to the spoken word: I liked the feedback for what it was, but I also found it a bit depressing. It was very personal… I felt I let you down. May be harder to hear a poor mark, rather than receiving it in writing. Nature and content of the feedback

18. Conclusions Students valued the medium as well as the message [Large, Generic Formative] Staff found it easier than expected after initial concerns – liked it and if carefully set up may save time NSS results highlight feedback as an issue; these pilots suggest this technology may increase student engagement with feedback and raise satisfaction in the lowest scoring NSS areas.

19. D epartment for Education and Skills (2005) Harnessing technology transforming learning and childrens services Available online at http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/e-strategy/ (accessed 6 nd April 2008).http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/e-strategy/ France, D., and Ribchester, C. (2008) Podcasts and Feedback. In Salmon, G., Edirisingha, P. (Ed.) Podcasting for Learning in Universities, pp. 70-79. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. France, D., and Wheeler, A. (2007) Reflections on Using Podcasting for Student Feedback. Planet 18, 9-11. http://www.gees.ac.uk/pubs/planet/p18/df2.pdf http://www.gees.ac.uk/pubs/planet/p18/df2.pdf Gibbs, G. (2006). How assessment frames student learning. In C. Bryan and K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative Assessment in Higher Education (pp 23-36). London: Routledge. GfK (2008) NUS/ HSBC Students Research. GfK Financial London, Study Number 154021 Handley, K., Szwelnik, A., Ujma, D., Lawrence, L., Millar, J. & Price. M. (2007). When less is more: Students experiences of assessment feedback. Paper presented at the Higher Education Academy Annual Conference, July 2007. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/events/conference/E5.doc HEFCE. (2009). E-learning strategy. Retrieved August 20, 2009 from www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2005/05_12/www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2005/05_12/ Nie, M. (2007). Podcasting for GEES Subjects. Paper presented at the IMPALA 2 workshop, Dec 2007. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from http://www2.le.ac.uk/projects/impala2/presentation/2nd%20Workshop/Presentations/Ming%20Niehttp://www2.le.ac.uk/projects/impala2/presentation/2nd%20Workshop/Presentations/Ming%20Nie Prensky, M. (2009) H. Sapiens Digital: From Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom. Innovate, 5, No3, pp1-9. (accessed 20 th August 2009). http://innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=705&action=articlehttp://innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=705&action=article Race, P. (1999). Enhancing student learning. Birmingham: SEDA. Salmon, G. & Edrisingha, P. (2008). Eds. Podcasting for Learning in Universities. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Including companion website: http://www.atimod.com/podcasting/index.shtmlhttp://www.atimod.com/podcasting/index.shtml References