Institutional roll out of submission and marking ss


Published on

Presentation for HeLF - EMA Electronic Management of Assessment Workshop

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Thanks for the comments on the presentation. Anything that makes the process easier to understand is a sensible step forward ;-)
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Excellent presentation Rob - I really like the idea of breaking the assessment lifecycle down into numbered sections and cross referencing all your support materials to this.

    all the best

    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Welcome and introductions
  • Have submission areas which support the e-learning flow [look for feedback]
  • Institutional roll out of submission and marking ss

    1. 1. Institutional Roll Out of Submission and Marking Rob Howe The University of Northampton Presentation at HeLF – EMA Electronic Management of Assessment Workshop 9th July, 2013
    2. 2. Learner Considerations 1. Flexibility of submission points 2. Readability 3. Feedback prompt and useful (NSS) (Hepplestone et al, 2011) 4. Usability and training See the SaGE blog for more details on Northampton’s approach
    3. 3. Need to join up University approaches Timings: <2010 – Small scale trials (Turnitin, SoundsGood Rotheram (2009) and Looks Good) 2010-2011 - Piloting 2012 – Whole University approach to submission and marking Items to consider: •Basic Comments •Rubrics •Voice Comments •Quickmark comments •Video feedback •Peer Assessment •Second marking •External examiners •Submission points •Letter grading vs numeric grading •Ensure robust functionality of the tools •Archive results in line with University policy
    4. 4. The SaGE workflow
    5. 5. Creating feedback opportunities Do students value feedback (or just the grade ?) “Staff complain that feedback does not work (Weaver 2006) and that students do not act on feedback (Mutch 2003). It is claimed that students are only concerned with their grades (Wojtas 1998; Nesbit and Burton 2006), see feedback as a means to justify the grade (Price and O’Donovan 2008; Price et al. 2010) or only read the qualitative comments if the quantitative mark is outside of their expectations (Duncan 2007).” (Hepplestone et al, 2011)
    6. 6. Some benefits for students • Allows students to read it at a time convenient to them • Allows them to concentrate more deeply on the comments in the absence of their peers. • Students able to access feedback whenever and wherever they complete future assessments. • Where grades are presented alongside feedback, students can use this information to inform their performance in future assessment tasks. • Feedback returned electronically may be returned quicker as time may be saved during administrative processes.
    7. 7. Did staff like it ? • Some did (after adapting their style)......others.....
    8. 8. Is it working? Feedback from students •Email • Blog • Spot surveys • Focus groups I also feel that lecturers returned grades to students much more promptly when they were on paper I do think that electronic feedback is good because it is easy and quick. It was beneficial as it is easier to hand in assignments instead of having to travel into the university however feel there is less feedback given It would be better if it was more uniform.I think its brilliant and it saves time and money on travelling.”
    9. 9. Top five tips 1. Pilot extensively on robust tools and ensure all areas of the institution are represented. 2. Consistent University policies and procedures – do assessments have to be bunched at the end / moderation or second marking ? 3. Mandatory (re)training for all staff involved and phased rollout. 4. Clear instructions for students. 5. Survey feedback – and keep refining.
    10. 10. Questions? Contact details: Rob Howe 01604 892483
    11. 11. References etc. Useful links • Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin, H., Thorpe, L., (2011) Using technology to encourage student engagement with feedback: a literature review . Research in Learning Technology Vol. 19, No. 2, July 2011, 117–127. • Rotheram, B. 2009. Sounds good: Quicker, better assessment using audio feedback. JISC funded project. Image credits • Photography by Rob Farmer, University of Northampton