This document discusses an introduction to electronic submission of student coursework at the University. It provides an overview of the policy context and drivers for moving to e-submission, including reducing student printing costs. The workshop covers benefits and opportunities of e-submission for staff and students, as well as considerations for software selection and implementation planning. Blackboard and Turnitin are compared for various submission and marking features. Other issues discussed include accessibility, service disruptions, and using e-submission as an opportunity to review feedback and marking processes.

1. Click to edit Master title style
Blackboard Assignment
Tool
Nick Bunyan, Dan Robinson, Alex Spiers & Tunde
Varga Atkins
An introduction to e-submission
Nick Bunyan, Dan Roberts, Alex Spiers & Tunde Varga-Atkins
eLearning Unit, CIE

2. Click to edit Master title styleWorkshop topics
In this one and a half hour session we will look at:
1. Policy context – your issues & requirements.
2. Benefits to staff & students.
3. Pedagogical opportunities.
4. Overview to the submission & marking processes.
5. Software selection - differences between
Blackboard and Turnitin tools.
6. Other issues for consideration.
7. Planning implementation.
8. Follow up guidance & support.

3. Click to edit Master title styleContext to this initiative
The University is moving to online submission for
coursework assignments (see this blog post for
more detail on policy).
• Driver for the policy initially has come from the
Guild – student printing costs.
• Draft coursework submission policy developed
in 2014.
• March 2016 decision to go for adoption of the
policy & to implement e-submission (not e-
marking) for 2016/17 academic year.

4. Coursework submission Policy
A few policy highlights:
3.1 Requires e-submission - 3.7 Encourages e-marking currently.
3.2 All coursework unless file format or design of exercise does
not permit.
– Non-written assessments
– Assessments containing visual, graphical or mathematical elements
– Impossible to administer
3.4 Students should be provided with guidance on processes of
e-submission including for declaration of specific learning
difficulty.

5. Coursework submission Policy
A few policy highlights:
3.5 When Uni systems temporarily down…
(section 3.5).
4.1 Anonymity should be maintained for all
internal marking and moderation.

6. Discussion
• What are you doing now?
• What are you planning?
• What is your school/department doing now?
• What is your school/department planning?
• What do you want to find out today?

7. Students and electronic submission
Benefits to students can include:
• Students can submit their work without having to travel to the University.
• Reduced printing costs.
• Meeting student expectations - seen by many students as normal practice in a digital age.
• Electronic reminders about marking turnaround times can be communicated through VITAL module
announcements etc.
Potential draw backs for students can include:
• For some large cohort programmes moving to e-submission can further reduce the physical contact
students have with a school or department.
• Service disruptions mean that students may not be able to submit on time.
Benefits for staff can include:
• Monitor student submissions and remind students about forthcoming submissions.
• Locate assessment support information alongside the submission tool.
Potential drawbacks for staff can include:
• Subtle variations in the features and facilities of using Blackboard or Turnitin e-marking tools
requires programme teams or module leaders to carefully think through their appropriate
application of technology and marking processes to meet their assessment requirements.

8. Students and electronic feedback
• Students access electronic feedback when they are
emotionally 'ready.‘
• Evidence that they referred back to feedback more often in
an electronic form (within a VLE etc.)
• Grades in a single place mean they can monitor their own
progress more easily.
• Typed feedback more legible.
• Benefits of separating feedback from grades - engaged
more with feedback if they received this first.
• Benefits of linking feedback to assessment criteria -
something you can do using Turnitin Feedback Studio
Taken from Technology, Feedback, Action!: The impact of learning technology upon
students' engagement with their feedback Sheffield Hallam University investigated
what students think of receiving feedback in an electronic form, how they use it etc.

10. Workflow overview

11. Click to edit Master title styleBlackboard and Turnitin - Decisions
Photo by maclauren70 - Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License https://www.flickr.com/photos/42386632@N00 Created with Haiku Deck

12. Blackboard vs Turnitin software selection
Issue/ facility Blackboard Assignment Turnitin Assignment
Single or multiple file submission. Multiple. Single only.
Group submission supported Yes. No.
File type restrictions 1. Mode 1 - None – Grade, criteria marking
and overall feedback comment for any
submission also possible here.
2. Mode 2 - To also use the Inline Grading
facility file types are restricted in this mode.
1. Mode 1 – For Originality Checking
(plagiarism) and Feedback Studio – file
types restricted.
2. Mode 2 – Mode 1 files plus some image
file types which can be annotated with
Feedback Studio.
3. Mode 3 – Any file can be submitted - no
Originality-Checking and restricted use of
Feedback Studio.
4. No submission - restricted use of
Feedback Studio (for presentations for
example).
File size limits. No - currently no file size limit but:
 Students may find very large files may
not upload with timeout issues.
 CSD to explore limits to submitted file
sizes.
 Video files should not be uploaded
(use Stream media server instead and
submit the link.)
Yes - maximum 40 Mb file size.
Anonymous submissions Yes – flexible. Yes – strict.
Electronic text matching to support
plagiarism & collusion detection.
No. Yes.
Ability for students to re-submit their work
after the due date.
Yes, students can re-submit their work after
the due date with specific settings. Copies of
all submissions are retained – late
submissions are indicated.
No.

13. Blackboard vs Turnitin software selection

14. Other issues for consideration
E-submission:
• Financial suspension.
• Academic integrity self-declaration, mitigating
circumstances.
• Accessibility issues (not fully tested yet).
• Service disruption (protocol being developed).
• Departmental printing costs.

15. Other issues for consideration
E-marking:
• Moderation – differences in how the software
enables moderation.
• External examiner access.

16. An opportunity?
Review the consistency and effectiveness of marking –
quality of comments, marking sheets (rubrics), can
students learn from feedback comments etc.
Are there opportunities to review the pedagogic
processes (feedback cycle), especially in the year 1 –
student transition to higher education?

17. Planning your implementation
• Review existing experiences.
• Network with similar departments.
• Select appropriate pilots (e-marking) –
involving admin staff & students.
• Develop a resourced training & support plan
for staff.
• Develop clear practical workflows (document).

18. Click to edit Master title styleTake away messages
• Careful planning and testing of the whole
lifecycle – where current processes may need to
be changed, involving all stakeholders.
• Consistency of approach in school, marking
teams etc.
• Awareness of ongoing development of
electronic tools.
• Further support.

19. Photo by oggin - Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License https://www.flickr.com/photos/85755792@N00 Created with Haiku Deck
NEED SUPPORT?
Contact the eLearning Unit
http://www.liverpool.ac.uk/elearning
Internal: 44567 (CSD Service desk)
elearning@liverpool.ac.uk
elearningatliverpool.wordpress.com/
@elearninglpool
Studio Wednesdays Drop in & chat