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

2. 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. 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. 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.

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

6. 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?

7. 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

8. 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

9. Common Feedback form for 2016-17

10. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. Thoughts and feedback?