1. Dr Lindsey Ferrie, Simon Cotterill Michael Thirlwell and Emma Curry
School of Biomedical Sciences
Encouraging students and staff to hear each others views in the feedback fog to support learning on both sides!
Dr Lindsey Ferrie, Simon Cotterill
Michael Thirlwell and Emma Curry
LTMS
Learning Technologies for Medical Sciences

2. Why was the project needed?
Despite consistently high (+95%) NSS overall satisfaction, feedback satisfaction is lower ~75%
Students express uncertainty in how to feed forward in non subject-specific content
Staff disengagement with feedback as a result of time limitations and student use.

3. A simpler approach offers greater support
The Feedback Foghorn
Less is more!
A simpler approach offers greater support

4. What the project did.
Collected staff and student opinions on feedback.
Supported a student designed add on to existing ePortfolio services which focuses on feedback.
Trialled use of the “Feedback Foghorn” with Biomedical Science undergraduates.
Currently integrating reflective feedback practices using the “Foghorn” in all degree programmes.

5. Who was involved Student interns Internet Developers
Michael Thirlwell and Emma Curry
Newcastle Work Experience scheme (Careers service) £600 for 100 hours support
Internet Developers
James Outterside and David Teasdale
Learning Technologies for Medical Sciences (LTMS)
Students and staff
SBMS and Psychology

6. Student design
‘Intermediate-2’ design
Michael
Emma
Mock-ups

7. Development (LTMS)
James David Simon

8. Going Forward Piloting Sustainability / Scalability
Admin tools
Standardised upload/integration processes
Assignment slots by module / academic year
Feedback (Grade Centre, Essay feedback etc.)

9. Outcomes Focus Groups Surveys Students (n = 72), Staff (n = 35)
Differences:
Frequency of discussing feedback with staff vs friends
76% students say never/once versus 40% reported by staff
Agreement that often students forget suggestions for improvement for the next piece of work.
43% students agree versus 66% staff
Similarities:
Marking criteria misunderstanding
Critical thinking and Integration of material highest ranked by both staff and students.
Storing/using student feedback in one place
BUT 90% students want this versus 69% staff
Focus Groups
Students (n = 15)
Marking criteria needs clarification and opportunity to talk to individuals

10. Outcomes Foghorn design/style
105 undergraduate students
Key word analysis – 74% positive response to design #4
User survey
12 SBMS students
75% agreed it would be useful for learning and applying feedback.

11. Advice Thanks Timing of student surveys
Impact of different data systems
Incentives budget!
Make use of student interns and NWE
Thanks