A department-wide approach to Feedback

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Primary Strategy Subject Leader Briefing June/July 2008 Leading on learning – making best use of Assessment for learning.
Advertisements

Enhancing Induction: Principles for Improving the Student Experience Engaging the learner: Why did I get 37%? Professor Brenda Smith Goldsmiths, University.
1 Developing Assignments using the assessment grid.
Key Stage 3 National Strategy Standards and assessment: session 3.
Key Stage 3 National Strategy Standards and assessment: session 1.
© Dr I M Bradley CG109 - Individual Project (Undergraduate) Overview Briefing.
Transforming lives through learning Learner Dialogue & Profiling.
Influencing critical engagement with assessment criteria Darrin Beattie, Careers Service Curriculum Development Officer Coherent Curriculum themes: assessment.
Why revisit the SA? Now you are in post, your view of your personal skills, needs and knowledge levels may have changed. Your mentor will probably not.
© Myra Young Assessment All rights reserved. Provided for the use of participants in AM circles in North Lanarkshire Council.
Food for thought: The students’ perspective of assessment and feedback Rita Headington, Hetty Barron, Michael Smith, Duncan Callnon.
UEL Guidelines for External Examiners Philip Brimson Quality Manager (Validation & Review)
Assessing Pupils’ Progress (APP) in English Workshop: Introducing APP February
0 Area Network Day - Summer Agenda 09:15 – 10:30 Assessing Pupil Progress 10:30 – 10:45 Break 10:45 – 12:00Raising Standards in Reading using.
Critical Thinking: Using Reflection Friday, 21 st November 2008.
OFSTED READINESS: RULES OF ENGAGEMENT 2014 BEA NOBLE-ROGERS TEACHER EDUCATION SOLUTIONS.
Working with course teams to change assessment and student learning: the TESTA approach to change Graham Gibbs.
October ISIS – Cluster Moderation Assessment and moderation in CfE is a process, not an event! Aims of the morning: To further inform participants in the.
Poster Assessment for Mathematics Students Ruth Fairclough School of Technology.
Collection of the Student’s Texts The Collection of the student’s texts promotes student engagement when students:  think about and choose the subject.
UEL Guidelines for External Examiners Philip Brimson Quality Manager (Validation & Review)
Marking Leslie Croxford & Kevin Millam. Purpose To help you to… mark consistently assess consistently develop robust assessment systems …in line with.
The Delivering Social Change Signature Project Planning effective intervention.
Creating a Key Stage 3 Foundation course that actually delivers progression for all Phil Smith FS Consultant Bury.
External examiner induction Alison Coates QA Manager (Validation & Review)
© Crown copyright 2008 Slide 1 AfL with APP for progression at Key Stages 2 and 3 Alan Howe Senior Director National Strategies.
©Dr I M Bradley Doing the project and other things.
Masters Level Modules Ros Ollin School of Education and Professional Development University of Huddersfield.
Marking/Second Marking & Feedback Dr Robert Hamilton AD(T) Loughborough University.
Key Stage 3 National Strategy Aims of session  To develop greater consistency in teacher assessment of ICT.  To develop a common understanding about.
Moderation and Validation of Teacher Judgements in School.
THE TRAINING AND ASSESSMENT TOOLKIT: A GUIDE TO ACCURACY UEL MENTOR TRAINING 3 JULY 2015.
1 Key Stage 1 Teacher Assessment Training January 2010.
ENGLISH APP TRAINING Cohort 3 NOVEMBER AIMS To be familiar with the APP materials and how they link together To develop understanding of the APP.
Assessment & Feedback Working Group Developing Departmental Assessment & Feedback Practices The ‘Quick Wins’ Paper.
Target Setting and monitoring in year 7.  To provide students with a meaningful aim for the end of year and end of GCSEs  To allow students to track.
Information for Parents Statutory Assessment Arrangements
Can a grade based approach improve our assessment practice?
UEL Guidelines for External Examiners
Leading Enhancement in Assessment and Feedback in Medical Sciences
Information for Parents Statutory Assessment Arrangements
The 5 Minute Marking Plan
Research, Reasoning and Rhetoric: Thinking with History: Lecture 6 Understanding marks and feedback 7: Understanding marks and feedback Ted Vallance.
“Embracing the Future”
Effective A Level languages teaching (ALM1)
Partnership Forum 2017 Partner Institution Survey 2016 :
Dr. Peter Hills, Kara Peterson, Simon Croker, and Dr. Rachel Manning
Why bother – is this not the English Department’s job?
PReSS – Iterative Assessment Review
The Literacy Hub Introduction Literacy Toolkit
Law Sub-panel Generic Feedback - Impact
The Languages Faculty Inspirational, International and Incredibly hardworking.
Mentor training Wednesday 13th February 2013.
DEVELOPMENTAL LEARNING AND TARGETED TEACHING
A department-wide approach to Feedback
Practice of Teaching Part 1
Practice of Teaching Part 1
Professional Tutor Conference 20th September 2018
Gemma mansi and Hilary Orpin
Creative assessment and feedback
Food for thought: The students’ perspective of assessment and feedback
In-Service Teacher Training
The MODERATION cycle.
Maximising your progress on your professional placements
RBWM SCITT Mentor Meetings 2017.
Applying for promotion on learning and teaching 1 Gathering Evidence
Partnership Moderation Report,
A Moodle-based Peer Assessment Tool
Utilising Module Evaluation data to explore outcomes from the Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework (TEF) Subject Level Pilot. Natalie Holland.
Presentation transcript:

A department-wide approach to Feedback Mandy Lee Jo Miller Department of Education and Childhood

A Review of Assessment and Feedback issues, Summer 2016 From surveys in 2015 and 2016: We have good results for A&F and we have some excellent practice – but perfection is elusive! Issues: Timing/organisation of assessments Preparing students for assessments Consistency in marking Feedback

3. Consistency in marking Marking is unfair because every teacher has different marking techniques. There doesn't seem to be an agreed consistent marking scheme across the modules. Have had mixed and sometimes conflicting information about criteria of assignments. On more than one occasion, this has led to confusion and lower marks than expected. The marks given on essays are very mixed depending on what marker you get. I feel this can be unfair and a marking system needs to be put in place to stop this happening. We also discussed the possibility that many of the comments on inconsistent marking may actually be about significant differences in foci in feedback – so may be a feedback issue rather than a marking one.

4. Feedback Feedback from assignments often need more clarity. Feedback can be unclear The marking and feedback is impersonal and does not consider the student and their development over the years. And when we looked at feedback earlier in the year we found a range of formats.

What issues do your programmes/departments face relating to A&F?

Review - Proposed actions for 2016-17 Points around Module planning for preparing students for the module and assessments Review of best practices in moderation To address issues of consistency and feedback issues: Develop one feedback sheet to use across the department – to include 3 development points – 2 of which must be transferable How do you try to ensure consistency of grading and feedback?

Department context – Common criteria already in place Used across all programmes for at least 4 years Each expressed separately at L1, L2, L3, LM A: Conceptual Domain B: Literature Domain C: Contextual Domain D: Research Domain E: Ethical Domain F: Values Domain G: Action Domain

Common criteria already in place - rationale When we had module-specific criteria it led to: Students needing to make sense of the criteria each time – without necessarily recognising the similarities between module criteria which may have been clear to us Inconsistency in marking, including between levels Common criteria have supported: Students’ developing understanding of expectations at this level of study, particularly critical analysis It makes it easier to use previous feedback to inform future work

Common Feedback form for 2016-17

Format: (Used alongside annotated scripts) Boxes: Highlights in appropriate places. Supports consistency Makes it clearer about how the mark was arrived at Supports clarity for markers (including new markers) and with it, parity across the marking team – visually supported ‘best fit’ Easier to target feedback Level-specific: Greater clarity for staff and students around level expectations (previously staff were subjectively judging against non-level specific criteria) Makes it easier to define progress and for students to plan for this – it had previously been hidden in staff level-judgements

Format Strengths + Guidance to improve: Consistently identified by students as a feature of effective feedback Should support the mark - one complaint about a mark was probably really about feedback – a modest mark but little indicated to improve on Student response – action: Prompts active engagement with the process Followed up in APT – this supports rather than replaces discussion

Where we are with this pilot Used in all modules Positive feedback from tutors & anecdotally from students Colleagues have suggested amends relating to : Efficiency of wording Some discussion about what goes against each level e.g. what the expectation is around use of primary sources Addition of an 80+ column Final drafts to a staff development session in July Process has promoted engagement with what we expect at each level and at grade boundaries Student feedback sought after the summer

Thoughts and feedback?