Designing for student uptake of feedback in EAP

1. Designing for student uptake of
feedback in EAP
Professor David Carless,
@CarlessDavid
CPD Hub for University English
Teachers,
March 2, 2019
The University of Hong Kong

2. Overview
1. Learning-oriented assessment
2. Designing feedback
3. Exemplars dialogues
4. Peer feedback
5. Challenges & Implications
The University of Hong Kong

3. Competing assessment functions
The University of Hong Kong

4. Learning-oriented assessment
Effective student learning as a key aim of
all assessment
The University of Hong Kong

5. The University of Hong Kong
Productive assessment
task design
Appreciating what quality
looks like
Student engagement
with feedback
Learning-oriented assessment framework
(Carless, 2015a)

7. SITUATING FEEDBACK
The University of Hong Kong

8. Design for student follow-up
The University of Hong Kong
“Feedback should
be more work for
the recipient than
the donor”
Dylan Wiliam

9. Uptake of feedback
Feedback needs to generate student action
The University of Hong Kong

10. Avoid learned helplessness
Resist giving feedback that makes the
learner more dependent on the teacher
The University of Hong Kong

11. Key aim of feedback
To enhance student
ability to self-monitor
their work in
progress
The University of Hong Kong

12. The University of Hong Kong
Meta-cognitive processes deployed when
working on a task
Internal Feedback

13. Sustainable feedback
Students generating & using feedback from
peers, self (or teachers) as part of self-
regulated learning (Carless et al., 2011)
The University of Hong Kong

14. Student feedback literacy
The University of Hong Kong
Making
Judgments
Appreciating
Feedback
Managing
Affect
Taking Action
(Carless & Boud, 2018)

15. DIALOGIC USE OF
EXEMPLARS
The University of Hong Kong

16. What are exemplars?
Samples of different levels used to illustrate
dimensions of quality
Usually assignments from a previous cohort
The University of Hong Kong

17. Engaging with quality
Student engage with quality & develop
capacities in making judgments
The University of Hong Kong

18. Exemplars & feedback
By developing capacities to make
judgments, students are learning to decode
feedback (Sadler, 2010; To & Carless,
2016)
The University of Hong Kong

19. Rationale for exemplars
Showing rather than telling
Making the tacit explicit
Clarifying expectations
The University of Hong Kong

20. ‘Model answer syndrome’
May reduce student
creativity
May lead to copying
(Handley & Williams,
2011)
The University of Hong Kong

21. Key element
The quality of dialogue about
exemplars is crucial (& challenging)
The University of Hong Kong

22. Phil Smyth, HKU
The University of Hong Kong

23. Phil’s Method
RQ: How do teachers manage the use of
exemplars in EAP?
Constructivist grounded theory
12 EAP teachers (interviews &
observations)
The University of Hong Kong

24. Teachers’ Approaches
A tightly structured approach
A more exploratory approach
A more participatory, dialogic approach
The University of Hong Kong

25. Dialogic strategies
Enabling student voice
Co-constructing or making sense of criteria
Seeding student self-regulation
The University of Hong Kong

26. The University of Hong Kong

27. Good exemplars dialogue
• Elicits student reasoning about the
exemplars;
• Prioritizes airing of divergent viewpoints;
• Highlights key qualities of exemplars.
(Carless & Chan, 2017)
The University of Hong Kong

28. PEER FEEDBACK
The University of Hong Kong

29. The University of Hong Kong

30. Defining peer feedback (PF)
“A communication process through which
learners enter into dialogues related to
performance & standards” (Liu & Carless,
2006, p. 280)
peer response (Liu & Hansen, 2002)
The University of Hong Kong

31. Key Rationale
Develop self-review strategies of detecting &
solving writing problems (Cho & MacArthur,
2011)
The University of Hong Kong

32. Dual processes
Composing
&
receiving
peer
feedback
The University of Hong Kong

33. A key point
Learners often gain more from composing
PF than from receiving it
(Lundstrom & Baker, 2009; Yu & Lee, 2015)
The University of Hong Kong

34. Technology-enabled PF
LMS
PeerMark
Web 2.0
The University of Hong Kong

35. Peer video feedback
Peer-to-peer video feedback
delivered via Facebook
Hung (2016)
The University of Hong Kong

36. Main challenges
Students don’t take it seriously
Students prefer teacher feedback
The University of Hong Kong

37. Training
Students need to be trained & coached in
how to carry out peer feedback (Min, 2006)
The University of Hong Kong

38. Recommended practice
• Sell rationale & benefits to students
• Communicate gains for ‘giver’
• Provide training, modeling & support
• Encourage collaborative climate
The University of Hong Kong

39. Implications
The University of Hong Kong

40. Feedback designs
Feedback as integral part of curriculum &
course design (Boud & Molloy, 2013)
The University of Hong Kong

41. Use resources wisely
Reduce teacher commentary at times when
it cannot reasonably be taken up (Boud &
Molloy, 2013)
The University of Hong Kong

42. The University of Hong Kong

43. ‘Black belt’ implications
1. Develop effective assessment &
feedback designs
2. Engage students in dialogues around
exemplars
3. Coach & support students in carrying out
peer feedback
The University of Hong Kong

44. References (1)
Boud, D. & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712.
Carless, D. (2015a). Exploring learning-oriented assessment processes. Higher Education, 69(6),
963-976.
Carless, D. (2015b). Excellence in University Assessment: learning from award-winning teachers.
London: Routledge.
Carless, D. & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of
feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325.
Carless, D. & K.K.H. Chan (2017). Managing dialogic use of exemplars. Assessment and Evaluation
in Higher Education, 42(6), 930-941.
Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices.
Studies in Higher Education, 36 (4) 395-407.
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2011). Learning by reviewing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1),
73-84.
Handley, K., & Williams, L. (2011). From copying to learning: Using exemplars to engage students
with assessment criteria and feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(1),
95-108.
Hung, S. T. A. (2016). Enhancing feedback provision through multimodal video
technology. Computers & Education, 98, 90-101.
The University of Hong Kong

45. References (2)
Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. Michigan:
University of Michigan Press.
Liu, N.F. & Carless, D. (2006) Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment, Teaching in
Higher Education, 11 (3), 279-290.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, K. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the
reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30-43.
Min, H.-T. (2006). The Effects of Trained Peer Review on EFL Students’ Revision Types and Writing
Quality. Journal of Second Language Writing 15 (2): 118-141.
Sadler, D. R. (2010). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex
appraisal. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 535-550.
To, J. & Carless, D. (2016). Making productive use of exemplars: Peer discussion and teacher
guidance for positive transfer of strategies. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 40(6), 746-
764.
Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2015). Understanding EFL students’ participation in group peer feedback of L2
writing: A case study from an activity theory perspective. Language Teaching Research, 19(5),
572-593.
Wiliam, D. (2015) Feedback for Learning: Make Time to Save Time.
https://www.dylanwiliamcenter.com/feedback-for-learning-make-time-to-save-time/
Winstone, N. & Carless, D. (2019, in press). Designing effective feedback processes in higher
education: A learning-focused approach. London: Routledge.
The University of Hong Kong

46. QUESTIONS
COMMENTS
The University of Hong Kong

47. Shifts in priorities
The University of Hong Kong
Increase Decrease
Feedback on students’
preferences
Feedback on teachers’ priorities
Within module guidance Terminal comments
Comments on first task Comments on final task
Feedback for first year
students
Feedback for final year
students

48. The University of Hong Kong