The University

Writing in STEM Disciplines: providing students with effective feedback and empowering students’ peer assessment

QuickTime™ and a decompressorare needed to see this picture.© Dr Trevor Day This presentation is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Facilitated by: Teresa McConlogue (University College London) and Paul Orsmond (Staffordshire University)

Hosted by: Trevor Day (University of Bath)

The University

Prompted by:

1. Higher Education Academy (HEA) workshop event at Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) in May 2012:

‘Judging quality in disciplinary writing: what can students learn from peer assessment and composing feedback?’

Co-organised by Teresa McConlogue and at which Teresa and Paul Orsmond facilitated workshops

2. Special interest group ‘Writing and Communicating in STEM Disciplines’ recognising that students giving and receiving feedback and students’ peer assessment were top of their teaching and learning agenda

Why this workshop?

The University

What do students learn about judging quality from composing peer feedback?

How does peer assessment facilitate the development of assessment literacy?

What is the purpose of peer assessment: a way of clarifying tutor values or a way of eliciting student values?

To what extent is there room for negotiation between tutors and students over how, and on what, judgements are made?

Questions raised by HEA/QMUL workshop presenters

The University

What? Who? A two-way process, ideally, whether between students and staff, or between students

Why? Hounsell (2003, p. 67) summarises it rather well ‘it has long been recognised, by researchers and practitioners alike, that feedback plays a decisive role in learning and development, within and beyond formal educational settings. We learn faster, and much more effectively, when we have a clear sense of how well we are doing and what we might need to do in order to improve.’

Feedback

The University

When? Formative and/or summative Where? Contexts: one-to-one/group, in class/lab/other

physical space/online, informal/formal, written/spoken/visual?

What? And how? These and the above questions explored in Teresa McConlogue’s workshop this morning

Feedback (continued)

The UniversityFeedback (continued)

Feedback is key to changing thought and behaviour, and facilitating movement towards goals (outcomes): Day & Tosey (2011)

The University

What? Who? Usually, a reciprocal process between students

Why?

Empowering students to take greater responsibility for their own learning

Building on co-constructivist principles, with the potential for learning taking place through ‘collaboration by learners in critical investigation, analysis, interpretation and reorganisation of knowledge’ (Carnell and Lodge, 2002, p. 14)

Potentially, a cost-effective way of marking the work of large numbers of students

Students’ peer assessment

The University

When? Formative and/or summative Where? Contexts: one-to-one/group, in class/lab/other

physical space/online, informal/formal, written/spoken/visual?

What? And how? These and the above questions explored in Paul Orsmond’s workshop this afternoon

Students’ peer assessment (continued)

The University

Who you are Your role Why you came to this event What you are hoping to gain by attending

Please complete Q1. Of ‘Planning, reflecting and taking action’

Introductions, expectations and intentions

The University

For more information about the HEA/QMUL workshop, including presentations, feedback and associated documents, visit:http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/events/detail/2012/seminars/themes/tw050_queen_mary

For more information about the special interest group ‘Writing and Communicating in STEM Disciplines’ visit:

http://go.bath.ac.uk/stemwritingandcommunicatingsig

The University

Carless, D., 2006. Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp. 219-233

Carnell, E. and Lodge, C., 2002. Supporting Effective Learning. London: Paul Chapman/Sage.Cartney, P., 2010. Exploring the use of peer assessment as a vehicle for closing the gap

between feedback given and feedback used. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), pp. 551-564

Day, T. and Tosey, P., 2011. Beyond SMART? A new framework for goal setting. The Curriculum Journal, 22(4), pp. 515-534

Falchikov, N., 2005. Improving Assessment through Student Involvement. Abingdon: Routledge Falmer.

Hounsell, D., 2003. Student feedback, learning and development, in: M. Slowey & D. Watson

(Eds) Higher education and the lifecourse. Maidenhead: Open University Press. McConlogue, T., Mueller, J. and Shelton, J., 2010. Challenges of developing engineering

students’ writing through peer assessment. Loughborough: Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre.

McConlogue, T., 2011. But is it fair? Developing students’ understanding of grading complex written work through peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), pp. 113-123

Selective bibliography (1)

The University

Nicol, D., 2010. From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), pp. 501-517

Nicol, D.J. and Macfarlane-Dick, D., 2006. Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp. 199-218

Orsmond, P., 2011. Self- and Peer-Assessment: Guidance on Practice in the Biosciences. 2nd ed. Ed: Stephen Maw. Leeds: Higher Education Academy Centre for Biosciences.

Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J. and O’Donovan, B., 2010. Feedback: all that effort, but what is the effect? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), pp. 277-289

Sadler, D.R., 2010. Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(5), pp. 535-550

Topping, K.J., 2005. Trends in Peer Learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), pp. 631-645

Selective bibliography (2)