Search results

In response to the less satisfied National Student Survey, UK universities have committed to transform assessment and feedback experience. This paper aims to explore how the diversity of online assessment and feedback offer a better learning experience for international students.

By using the action research method, the research investigated academic and international students' first experience on audio feedback and online text. Video interviews and online questionnaires were carried out.

All research participants would like to receive assessment feedback in audio form. This reflects the learning experience of students and suggests that the support of a higher educational institution or a tutor could provide for assessment and feedback enhancement in the digital world is mandatory. Other than the technological and instrumental advantage, the “human element” of audio feedback makes it unique and interesting to listen to in contrast to online written feedback.

It is recognised that the number of student participants was small but the qualitative findings demonstrate some key issues in relation to international student experience and the effectiveness and engagement of assessment feedback that may inspire future empirical research.

Some conditions under which feedback is likely to be effective are not met as frequently as originally believed, audio feedback can be thoughtfully considered as an alternative assessment feedback mechanism for international students.

The “‘human element’ of audio assessment feedback” defeats online written text for international students. They appreciate the effort spent by the tutor to provide them assessment and feedback personally by “talking to them”.

This paper explores the challenge of “fuzzy” assessment criteria and feedback with a view to aiding student learning. The paper untangles three guiding principles as mechanisms to enhance the effectiveness of assessment and feedback through overcoming the inherent challenges which stem from tacit judgement during assessment.

The paper applies a realistic evaluation methodology, with a framework for assessment and feedback consisting of three principles – Means, Opportunity and Motivation (MOM). Through in-depth interviews with undergraduate and postgraduate management students the paper identifies how and when the means, opportunity and motivation principles impact student learning through assessment and the utility of the feedback received on their learning.

The findings in the paper illustrate that students do not always understand the feedback they receive on their learning because they do not fully understand the criteria to which it refers due to the tacit dimensions of assessment. The findings substantiate the proposition that effective assessment processes must ensure that students have the means, opportunity and motivation to use feedback and to understand the criteria, a central component of which is understanding tacit dimensions of assessment.

The paper deciphers three practical implications for instructors related to (1) teaching, (2) course and program design and (3) the nature of the feedback instructors should provide.

While prior scholarship has flagged the challenge of “fuzzy” assessment and feedback, this paper identifies when and how the means, opportunity and motivation principles are manifested in the process of making the tacit components of assessment codified and actionable, a critical process in developing expert learners.

Lack of appropriate student support and drawbacks in academic progression signify the importance of enhancing assessment and feedback in higher education (HE). Although assessment and feedback are significant in HE, minimal empirical research holistically explores the best practices. This study aims to address the niche and develop a decisive guideline for enhancing assessment setting and feedback provision within HE curricula.

A systematic approach was taken to obtain data for the study: a literature review underpinning the thematic content analysis of study documents, followed by semi-structured interviews. Document analysis contained mid-module reviews/student feedback; rubrics used in assessment; and formative/summative feedback provided for the graded work. Documental analysis informed the key attributes of the semi-structured interview. Interpretive structural modelling (ISM) analysis identified the influence and reliance of each driver.

This study revealed 15 drivers – 4 fundamental, 6 significant and 5 important – for enhancing assessment and feedback. The level partitioning from the ISM analysis established that all assessment and feedback needs to be underpinned by the university policy and fed into the assessment regime and marking scheme. This study identified that National Student Survey results were significantly improved due to implementing said drivers compared with the national and sector benchmarks.

The developed drivers enable the best practices in assessment setting and feedback provision. The level partition diagram can be used as a decisive guideline or a provisional framework in assessment and feedback provision for quality assurance in HE.

This study is one of, if not the only, to develop a guideline for signposting drivers and their influence and reliance to enhance assessment and feedback in a holistic HE setting. The developed drivers and the level partition diagram bring novelty and add to the current body of knowledge.

Organization development is focused on implementing a planned process of positive humanistic change in organizations through the use of social science theory, action research, and data-based feedback methods. The role of personality in that change process, however, has historically been ignored or relegated to a limited set of interventions. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a conceptual overview of the linkages between personality and OD, discuss the current state of personality in the field including key trends in talent management, and offer a new multi-level framework for conceptualizing applications of personality for different types of OD efforts. The chapter concludes with implications for research and practice.

In light of a new paradigm to feedback, the focus shifts from how and when instructors deliver feedback to how the learning environment and the feedback practices sustain agentic behavior on feedback. Feedback produces learning if the students are given the opportunity to use and to act on it, and thus to move forward. Ample research on innovative models and designs for feedback and assessment in higher education courses exist. However, a one-size-fits-all model does not exist. Each university setting represents a unique case, and hence the replicability of a model is impossible. This poses a challenge for innovative higher education institutions (HEIs) that consider the promotion of students’ agency on feedback, a distinguishing attribute for their learning experience onsite, and in the Covid-19 inflicted transition to remote instruction. This study used content analysis to investigate how feedback and assessment feedback design, in the online component of a blended course in English for Academic Purposes, can sustain opportunities for feedback encounters and enable student uptake of feedback. After exploring the process of assessment and feedback design, different agents of the course and potential feedback encounters were mapped and analyzed in a sociocultural perspective. An established matrix of feedback for learning was used to investigate and code the feedback encounters generated in the course. The results of the content analysis indicated satisfactory student uptake of feedback and opportunities for potential feedback encounters before, during, and after the assessment. Additionally, the results pointed to the need for more feedforward and self-regulatory commentaries.

The aim of the study is to explore perceptions of the impact of assessment feedback by international undergraduate nursing students. Research to date indicates that summative assessment feedback may impact significantly on student achievement but if it is undertaken sub optimally or does not provide students with the opportunity to engage with the process and reflexively respond, it can also be exceptionally damaging to the learning experience.

A scoping exercise of overall student feedback experience was initially collated via the adoption of an Interpretive Phenomenological Approach (IPA). Participants were recruited via purposive sampling and the LEGO® Serious Play® method was used to collect data. Analysis with Quirkos software was used to examine the salience as well as commonality of findings as an integral part of a recognised five-step thematic analytical approach.

Feedback was perceived, by students, as significantly impacting factor in relation to their overall progression, attainment and retention rates. Themes generated from the findings evidenced student perceptions that summative feedback is a positive driver and source of motivation for academic success and progression. It was perceived that levels of attainment were related to the clarity, quality and individualised nature of feedback that students received and that this was perceived to be evident in their final grades. These were accompanied by perceptions that feedback clarity also determined the potential of breaking down perceived student barriers to learning, their perceived capacity for effective assignment planning and preparation and the likelihood of them having any positive collective or individual interpersonal relationships with their tutors. Summarised, students perceived that feedback ought to lead to student empowerment in managing their studies and as such it ought to be clear, straightforward and non-ambiguous.

The methodological design of the study means that generalisability from its findings was never intended or possible. However, there may be the potential transferability of findings to similar institutions and contexts of nurse education with students who have similar demographic profiling. The study was also a means of providing an insight into the lived experience of students which could be used in the prospective adaptation of feedback mechanisms for staff at a local level within Higher Education.

The study reveals the perceived impact of gamification as a mechanism of summative assessment as conveyed by a designated group of students. Whilst specific recommendations for change can only be made within the context specificity of the research, there may be aspects of the findings which are potentially transferable to other similar contexts of Higher Education delivery whose pedagogical approaches mirror those in operation at the institution where the research was undertaken. It became apparent that the standardisation of feedback approaches offered many opportunities to improve existing systems. The issue of monitoring workloads is also of significance in terms of the level and degree of summative assessment and feedback that academic staff can undertake.

The study revealed the perceived magnitude of assessment feedback on progression, attainment and retention rates, alongside the perceived need for a universal feedback template and the opportunity to provide audio-video feedback. This study adds to existing knowledge in the field of pedagogic practice about both the execution of LEGO® Serious Play® as a research methodology and why the perceptions of feedback as articulated and illuminated by a group of contemporary nursing students ought to matter in the context of Higher Education.

In reflective writing, students are encouraged to examine their own setbacks and progress. With a shortage of guidance in how to provide feedback to students on this type of writing, teachers are often left to figure it out on the job. The central hypothesis in this paper is that the lens of reflective practice can help focus teacher efforts and ultimately improve both feedback and instruction. The purpose of this paper is not to produce a universal prescription for assessing reflective writing but rather a protocol for teacher reflective practice that can apply to challenging grading and feedback-giving situations.

Student assessment is a chance for teachers to learn about their students’ abilities and challenges and to provide feedback for improvement. Assessment and grading sessions can also become opportunities for teachers to examine their own instructional and assessment practices. This self-examination process, a cornerstone of reflective practice (Schön, 1984), is challenging, but it may be especially valuable when guidelines for feedback and assessment are hard to come by. Such may be said to be the case in student-centered learning environments such as school Fablabs and makerspaces, where stated goals commonly include cultivating learner self-regulation and resilience. These hard-to-measure constructs are typically assessed through analysis of student reflective journals. This in-depth case study uses mixed-methods to examine how a semester-long intervention affected the grading, feedback and instructional practices of a teacher in a hands-on design classroom. The intervention involved 10 grade-aloud sessions using a computer-based rubric tool (Gradescope) and a culminating card-sorting task. The lens of reflective practice was applied to understanding the teacher’s development of their own reflective capabilities.

During the intervention, the participating teacher grappled with grading and feedback-giving dilemmas which led to clarifications of assessment objectives; changes to instruction; and improved feedback-giving practices, many of which persisted after the intervention. The teacher perceived the intervention as adding both rigor and productive “soul-searching” to their professional practice. Lasting changes in feedback behaviors included a comprehensive rubric and an increase in the frequency, specificity and depth of feedback given to student written work.

Significant prior efforts have been directed separately at the use of reflective practice for teachers, in general, and on the feedback and grading of student process journals. This work combines these lines of inquiry in the reflective classroom assessment protocol, a novel on-the-job professional development opportunity that fosters reflective practice in times of assessment to improve instructional and feedback practices.

This study aims to investigate quality of feedback as offered by supervisor-assessors with varying levels of assessor expertise following assessment of performance in residency training in a health care setting. It furthermore investigates if and how different levels of assessor expertise influence feedback characteristics.

Experienced (n=18) and non-experienced (n=16) supervisor-assessors with different levels of assessor expertise in general practice (GP) watched two videotapes, each presenting a trainee in a “real-life” patient encounter. After watching each videotape, participants documented performance ratings, wrote down narrative feedback comments and verbalized their feedback. Deductive content analysis of feedback protocols was used to explore quality of feedback. Between-group differences were assessed using qualitative-based quantitative analysis of feedback data.

Overall, specificity and usefulness of both written and verbal feedback was limited. Differences in assessor expertise did not seem to affect feedback quality.

Results of the study are limited to a specific setting (GP) and assessment context. Further study in other settings and larger sample sizes may contribute to better understanding of the relation between assessor characteristics and feedback quality.

Findings suggest that even with supervisor-assessors with varying levels of assessor expertise who are trained in performance assessment and the provision of performance feedback, high-quality feedback is not self-evident; coaching “on the job” of feedback providers and continuous evaluation of feedback processes in performance management systems is crucial. Instruments should facilitate provision of meaningful feedback in writing.

The paper investigates quality of feedback immediately following assessment of performance, and links feedback quality to assessor expertise. Findings can contribute to improvement of performance management systems and assessments for developmental purposes.