enhancing assessment and feedback: an evidence-based response chris rust deputy director aske centre...

Enhancing assessment and feedback: an evidence-based response

Chris RustDeputy DirectorASKe Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning(Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange)Head, Oxford Centre for Staff & Learning DevelopmentOxford Brookes University

ASKe Directorate: Margaret Price, Jude Carroll, Berry O’Donovan and Chris Rust

Assessment Standards Knowledge exchange

Programme

1.15 Coffee

1.30 Welcome and introduction

1.35 Activity

1.50 Tacit knowledge & the social-constructivist assessment

process model

2.10 Student engagement with criteria

2.30 Feedback - the issues

2.45 Activity - 7 conditions

2.55 Improving feedback - preparing students

3.05 Activity

3.20 Improving feedback - making it fit for purpose

3.40 Activity

4.10 The rest of the cycle

4.20 Summation & evaluation

4.30 End


Three main points from the literature

Assessment and feedback are key drivers of student learning

Current assessment and feedback processes are often not effective

There is lots of useful and evidence-based meta-level advice in the literature plus a plethora of articles on successful practice.


Focus of ASKe

Communicating and engaging students with assessment requirements: standards, criteria and feedback

A key issue in assessment is that students often do not understand what is a better piece of work and do not understand what is being asked of them particularly in terms of standards and criteria (O’Donovan et al., 2001)

Feedback is also often not understood (Lea and Street, 1998), often considered too vague (Higgins, 2000) and the language complex and subject to interpretation (Lea and Street, 1998; Ridsdale 2003)


Two students are given the same written assessment task (e.g. an essay in your discipline). In the tutor feedback on the task both students are congratulated on producing a ‘highly analytical’ piece of work. One student is a postgraduate, the other a first year undergrad.

Does the term ‘highly analytical’ mean something different at these two levels? And, if so, what is the difference? How do you explain to students the standard of work expected?

Activity


Meaningful understanding of standards requires both tacit and explicit knowledge (O’Donovan, B., Price, M., & Rust, C., 2004)

“we can know more than we can tell” (Polanyi, reprinted 1998, p.136).

Verbal level descriptors are inevitably ‘fuzzy’ (Sadler 1987) There is a cost (in terms of time and resources) to codifying

knowledge which increases the more diverse an audience’s experience and language (Snowdon, 2002).

Tacit knowledge is experience-based and can only be revealed through the sharing of experience – socialisation processes involving observation, imitation and practice (Nonaka, 1991)

‘making sense of the world’ is seen as a social and collaborative activity (Vygotsky, 1978).

Making meaning requires explicit and tacit knowledge


Social-constructivist view of assessment

the social-constructivist view of learning argues that knowledge is shaped and evolves through increasing participation within different communities of practice

the social-constructivist process model of assessment argues that students should be actively engaged with every stage of the assessment process in order that they truly understand the requirements of the process, and the criteria and standards being applied, and should subsequently produce better work (Rust C., O’Donovan, B., & Price, M., 2005)

So what are we bringing to the party?


Active engagement with feedback

Explicit Criteria

Completion and submission of work

Students Active engagement with criteria


Marking exercise

Immediate results participants av. mk non participants av. mk.

Cohort 1 (99/00) 59.78 54.12Cohort 2 (00/01) 59.86 52.86Cohort 3 (01/02 55.7 49.7

Results 1 year later

Cohort 1 57.91 51.3Cohort 2 56.4 51.7

Rust, C., Price, M & O’Donovan, B.(2003) "Improving students’ learning bydeveloping their understanding of assessment criteria and processes”Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 28, No. 2



Explicit Criteria




Potential of feedback

Feedback is the most powerful single influence that makes a difference to student achievementHattie (1987) - in a comprehensive review of 87 meta-analyses of studies

Feedback has extraordinarily large and consistently positive effects on learning compared with other aspects of teaching or other interventions designed to improve learningBlack and Wiliam (1998) - in a comprehensive review of formative assessment

Students are hungry for feedback to develop their learning(Higgins et al, 2002)


Retention and feedback

The number of opportunities available for feedback is an important variable in non-completion of students in the early years of study

(Yorke, 1999)

Where students are uncertain about their ability to succeed, formative feedback is of particular importance

(Yorke & Longden, 2004)


Feedback problems

• Unhelpful feedback (Maclellan, 2001)• Too vague (Higgins, 2000)• Subject to interpretation (Ridsdale, 2003)• Not understood (e.g. Lea and Street, 1998)• Don’t read it (Hounsell, 1987)• Damage self-efficacy (Wotjas, 1998)• Has no effect (Fritz et al, 2000)• Seen to be too subjective (Holmes & Smith,

2003)


11 conditions under which assessment supports learning 1 (Gibbs and Simpson, 2002)

1. Sufficient assessed tasks are provided for students to capture sufficient study time (motivation)

2. These tasks are engaged with by students, orienting them to allocate appropriate amounts of time and effort to the most important aspects of the course (motivation)

3. Tackling the assessed task engages students in productive learning activity of an appropriate kind (learning activity)

4. Assessment communicates clear and high expectations (motivation)


11 conditions under which assessment supports learning 2 (Gibbs and Simpson, 2002)

5 Sufficient feedback is provided, both often enough and in enough detail

6 The feedback focuses on students’ performance, on their learning and on actions under the students’ control, rather than on the students themselves and on their characteristics

7 The feedback is timely in that it is received by students while it still matters to them and in time for them to pay attention to further learning or receive further assistance

8 Feedback is appropriate to the purpose of the assignment and to its criteria for success.

9 Feedback is appropriate, in relation to students’ understanding of what they are supposed to be doing.

10 Feedback is received and attended to.11 Feedback is acted upon by the student


Improving feedback - prepare students (in Yr 1 esp.)

• Aligning expectations (of staff & students, & between teams of markers)

- often a mismatch of expectations e.g correcting errors, advice for the future, diagnosis of general problems, comments specific only to that piece of work. These mismatches occur frequently with no particular pattern about who holds which view/perspective but problems arise when the the two don't coincide. Purpose of feedback may vary from assignment to assignment so would need to be clarified each time. (Freeman & Lewis, 1998)

• Identifying all feedback available

• Model the application of feedback

- e.g. using previously-marked assignments to show how feedback was used to improve later assignments

• Encourage the application of feedback

- e.g. in a subsequent piece of work the student is required to show how they have used prior feedback to try to improve their work and some marks allocated for this.

• Require and develop self-assessment

it is the interaction between both believing in self-responsibility and using assessment formatively that leads to greater educational achievements(Brown & Hirschfeld, 2008)


Activity

In 3’s, discuss:

• How do you currently prepare students to understand and engage with feedback?

• Which of these ideas could you introduce, or develop further, and how?


Improving feedback - ensure it is fit for purpose• Ensure students have MOM - Motive, Opportunity, Means (Angelo, 2007)• Draft-plus-rework - feedback effort (for markers and students) is located at

the draft stage, and possibly only a summative grade is given for the final submission

• Improve the linkage of assessment strategies across programmes and between modules/units

• Increase student engagement and understanding through dialogue - in-class discussion of exemplars, peer-review discussions supported by tutors, learning-sets, etc.

• Identify what is feasible in a given assessment context - written feedback can often do little more than ‘diagnose’ development issues and then direct students to other resources for help and support

• Ensure it is timely - ‘quick and dirty’ generic feedback, feedback on a draft, MCQs & quizzes, etc. (using technology may help)

• Consider the role of marks - they obscure feedback• Reduce over-emphasis on written feedback - oral can be more effective

(McCune, 2004). But individual F2F can be resource intensive• Review resource allocations (N.B. OU 60%)


Activity

Individually:

Choose one or more specific ideas to improve feedback that you think you could use. In as much detail as possible, identify how you would put the idea/s into practice.

In pairs:

Take it in turns to explain your plans to your partner. The job for the listener is to be a friendly and constructive critic


7 principles of good feedback practice (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, 2006)

Good feedback practice:

1. helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, expected standards)

2. facilitates the development of reflection and self-assessment in learning

3. delivers high-quality information to students about their learning4. encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning5. encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem6. provides opportunities to close the gap between current and desired

performance7. provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the

teaching



Explicit Criteria



Assessment design & development of explicit criteria

Tutor discussion of criteria

Marking and moderation

Staff Assessment guidance to staff



Explicit Criteria



Assessment design & development of explicit criteria

Tutor discussion of criteria

Marking and moderation

Staff Assessment guidance to staff

Rust C.,O’Donovan B & Price., M (2005)

enhancing assessment and feedback: an evidence-based response chris rust deputy director aske centre...

Documents

literature assessment

assessment requirements

tacit knowledge slide

activity slide

terms of standards

written assessment task

explicit knowledge odonovan

feedback processes