79% have an institution-wide policy while 21% don’t.
However, nearly half (47%) of institutions have not yet considered the regulations. This illustrates the ad hoc development of eSubmission as it moves to a mainstream activity. If implementation is happening in departments then institutions will need to make it a priority to review their regulations.
. "I feel very confident my institution has the policies and procedures in place for the effective management of electronic submission of student work." 60% are therefore stating that they are not confident that their institution has the policies and procedures in place for the effective management of electronic submission of student work.
The main change was in the increase in the number of unsure responses. This could be due to HeLF members having an overview of institutional developments rather than knowing the specific situation within individual departments. Many universities have over 20 departments and these many have high levels of autonomy.
However, academic attitudes towards eMarking show a sharp contrast to those for eSubmission and eFeedback. Only 13% have a positive attitude whereas 34% have a negative one.
eSubmission – Institutional Policies and Academic Attitudes
eSubmission – Institutional Policies and Academic Attitudes<br />Dr Barbara Newland, BrightonLindsay Martin, Edge HillAndy Ramsden, University Campus Suffolk<br />
What is eSubmission?<br />Methodology<br />Results<br />Questions<br />Overview<br />
The term eSubmission is used very widely to cover a range of activities which include:<br />eSubmission<br />eMarking<br />eFeedback<br />eReturn<br />Plagiarism deterrence and detection<br />What is eSubmission?<br />
eSubmission – online submission of an assignment<br />eMarking – marking a paper online<br />eFeedback - producing online feedback which could be text, audio etc but not paper<br />eReturn – online return of marks<br />Definitions<br />
To identify current practice with regard to eSubmission, eMarking and eFeedback in UK HE<br />To gain a snapshot of the strategic overview identifying key issues relating to assessment regulations and academic attitudes<br />Aim<br />
eSubmission is being implemented in universities within the UK<br />Not a new initiative but has developed on an ad hoc, experimental basis within individual institutions across the sector<br />On the verge of a step-change from experimental to mainstream adoption of eSubmission<br />Driven largely by expectations of efficiency gains and an improved student experience <br />Rationale<br />
Online survey on eSubmission was circulated to HeLF as its members can provide the institutional perspective on eLearning<br />Methodology<br />
A network of senior staff in institutions engaged in promoting, supporting and developing technology enhanced learning<br />Over 125 nominated Heads from UK Higher Education institutions<br />A regular programme of well attended events <br />Represents the interests of its members to various national bodies and agencies including the Higher Education Academy and JISC<br />www.helf.ac.uk<br />Heads of eLearning Forum (HeLF)<br />
The survey took about 10 minutes to complete<br />Participants were assured that all data collected in the survey would be held anonymously and securely<br />No personal data was asked for or retained unless the participant indicated a willingness to participate in the follow-up activity<br />The questions were a mixture of closed multiple-choice and multiple selection as well as open response type<br />The survey was available for a month in 2011 and the results were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods.<br />Methodology<br />
Lunchtime presentations<br />Events which are part of Faculty learning and teaching events<br />Show-n-share events<br />Learning and Teaching committees<br />Faculty presentations by staff<br />Advice and consultancy<br />Virtual Communities of Practice<br />Checklists for academics, students, and administrative staff. <br />An opportunity for HeLF members to participate in the collaborative sharing and creation of open educational learning resources. <br />Other ways of giving advice<br />
“The VCs support for this, based on student feedback, has given this strong importance across the institution. Managers have bought in to the VCs vision.” <br />“E-feedback may be held up as a way of meeting Uni's deadlines for providing feedback to students.” <br />Managers “want to encourage saving time.”<br />Driven by student feedback<br />
Staff have spent their academic careers marking piles of papers. They have found ways of making this as effective and efficient as possible. <br />Mark anywhere they can carry the papers from their office, to the garden or while travelling such on the train. <br />In some institutions it is thought that academic anxieties about marking online are changing and “falling away slowly.” <br />Current effective practice<br />
Many academics are anxious about the change<br />Connectivity - If the eMarking system is online then there can be issues with connectivity when away from the office. <br />Health and safety issues such as “head ache, eye strain and back/posture issues.”<br />Increase in workload - “downloading/re-uploading etc, audio feedback is also perceived by many to be time consuming.” <br />However, many academics do not want to mark on screen as “mainly it is a preference from habit”<br />HeLFmembers recognise that that staff will require support through “this major change in working practice.” <br />Concerns<br />
The need for an “appropriate method for submission that is robust, reliable and secure” was recognised<br />“Higher use of these processes demands highly resilient VLE infrastructure.” <br />Interestingly, there may be a robust method but “staff sometimes are using other tools in ways we do not recommend which causes trouble. “<br />Technical concerns<br />
“There is also a question about student expectations and preparedness for new and different forms of feedback. Students are not always sure how to interpret and use new forms like audio feedback.” <br />There are also concerns about who will support students in this process. <br />Student anxieties<br />
Anonymous marking<br />Double marking<br />Archiving<br />Data protection<br />Variety of file formats<br />All of these will need to be addressed for the effective use of eSubmission. <br />Other concerns<br />
The findings indicate a wider spread and increasing use of e-submission across the sector and academic staff perceptions are relatively positive about these developments<br />The process of implementation is generally occurring in departments and Schools with institutional changes in policy and practice following afterwards<br />However, at the institutional level, there might need to be a review of codes of practice and regulations<br />Conclusion<br />
Effective eSubmission has the potential to increase efficiency in organisations by improving their business processes and eFeedback may enhance learning<br />In order to see the potential benefits offered then it will be necessary to address the major anxieties about academic attitudes to eMarking and eFeedback as well as the need for robust technical infrastructure<br />One HeLF member commented that it “needs a lot of different stakeholders to work together to make it effective and as we know when projects like this are outside the control of a single unit within an institution it is almost impossible to get consensus or agreed processes.”<br />Conclusion<br />
References<br />HeLF. (2011) www.helf.ac.uk<br /> <br />JISC. (2007) Student Expectations Study, available from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/research/2007/studentexpectations.aspx<br />JISC. (2009) Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World, available from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/generalpublications/2009/heweb2.aspx<br />Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) Rethinking Formative Assessment in HE: a theoretical model and seven principles of good feedback practicehttp://business.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/tla/assessment/web0015_rethinking_formative_assessment_in_he.pdf<br />Redecker, C. (2009) Review of Learning 2.0 Practices: Study on the Impact of Web 2.0 Innovations on Education and Training in Europe<br />Smith, S. D. & Borreson Caruso, J. (2010) The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology,(Research Study, Vol. 6). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, 2010, available from http://www.educause.edu/ecar, (1998), ‘Growing Up Digital: the Rise of the Net Generation’, McGraw Hill, New York<br />