Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Workshop for New Lecturers:Statement Bank/‘Boiler Plating’ Feedback Approaches
Date: 30-31 January, 2007
Dr Alan WebbSubject Centre Associate based atThe University of Ulster, JordanstownCampus
Applications
• In cases where there are large numbers of students and the need to give reasonably detailed feedback to each one, while maintaining consistency of approach and general equity of treatment.
• In relation to written submissions such as library based assignments and formal structured reports or dissertations, where detailed comments need to be made and where similar issues are likely to arise within a given cohort of students
Working towards Comprehensive Boiler-Plating in Subject-Based Formative
Feed-Forward & Feedback Strategies
January, 2007
J Alan C Webb,BSc(QUB), PhD(QUB), PgCUT(UU), MIPEM, CSci, CEng, MIET, ILTM
Coordinator of Student Learning,
School of Electrical & Mechanical Engineering
&
Subject Director for Engineering,
Subject Centre Associate, HEA/Engineering
What is a Boilerplate ?
Traditionally, lawyers use the term "boilerplate" to refer to the standardized, "one size fits all" provisions that generally appear at the end of a contract, including choice of law, notice, arbitration, force majeure and assignments.
Originally, a boiler plate was added to the outside casing of a boiler and was generally made of brass, with embossed letters or engravings and attached at the corners with screws or rivets
Boiler plates and Statement Banks
• A static boiler plate can be thought of as an established statement, stored within a statement bank in a ‘one size fits all’ mode
• A dynamic boiler plate can be thought of as an adaptable statement which can be modified, personalised and relocated; a ‘one size fits most, with a tweak’ mode
How many times have I had to say that?
• We all tend to grow weary of saying the same things over and over again
• It is difficult to remain consistent if we are working through a large pile of submissions
• If we are growing tired, our writing can be harder to read and we may start to abbreviate our feedback comments
How many different things will I need to say on a regular basis?
• It’s surprising to discover how many different things need to be repeated.
• In an ideal world, would you ever have to repeat yourself?
• Have you any idea of the number of generic comments that you tend to repeat, on a range of submissions of different types?
Formative feedback interest: Any marks yet?
1.
Identify generic issues which are repeated across a range of formative
feedback activities.
2.
Design ‘boiler plate’ formative
statements which are likely to have
wide application across a
range of coursework types.
3.
Generate a set of ‘boiler plates’ in the form of a numbered list, for easy
subsequent citation: Facilitate personalised free-text
messages also; dynamicoption
4.Group plates into logically ordered sets,
so that appropriate plates can be found readily, to match feedback
needs:(linked ICONS possibly)
5.
Start repeating numbers/ICONS and memorizing favourites, instead of repeating lengthy comments on
students’ scripts/reports.
Front-loading the learning experience (feed-forward)
• We tend to be frightened of early success. (Let them find out gradually!)
• We discover that in year two and even later, elementary mistakes are still arising. (Tell them until you’re blue in the face!)
• Why not reveal all the plates from the outset? (Treat the list as a learning tool.)
The approach is on-line friendly for open and distance learning
• Why not provide lists of ‘boiler plates’ on course websites and module resource pages? (Look after the photocopying budget)
• There may be potential for the standardisation of lists across a range of subjects (Talk to another academic! It’s amazing how many don’t.)
• Encourage the students to reflect on boiler plate progress via PDP. (Nurture a reflective learner)
Some points for caution
• Students with special needs need to be given feedback on issues that will nevertheless be marked sympathetically: care is needed to ensure that the correct balance is struck in both communication and implementation of related assessments (i.e. in making academic judgements)
• Personalised feedback is a worthy objective and boiler-plating mitigates against this, to some extent
Caution continued:
• There is a need for positive/supportive comment options to encourage students;
• There are serious risks of feedback overload if we say all that we could, in response to work offered;
• More research is needed into student perceptions of what is meant by specific statements. (don’t assume they know our language!)
Evaluation
• While there is an established history of using the technique, the developed set of plates is still at an early stage of evaluation – HEA subject centre(x2) uptake is live.
• Initial feedback from current project students suggests that the approach is welcome, with the feed-forward aspect proving to be appealing.
• Students clearly want to know how to score higher – Assessment remains a strong driver for learner motivation.
References
• Brown, G. et al, (1997) Assessing Student Learning in Higher Education London: Routledge
• Brown, G., (2001) Assessment: A Guide for Lecturers: Assessment Series No 3: LTNS Generic Centre
• Rust, C., (2002) ‘The impact of assessment on student learning; how can research literature practically help to inform the development of departmental assessment strategies and learner-centered assessment practices’ Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol 3, No 2, 145-158, ILT Paul Chapman Publ.
References continued:• Whitelegg, D., (2002) ‘Breaking the feedback loop:
problems with anonymous assessment’ Planet, Ed. 3, 7-8, LTSN Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences
• Murray, R.E.G., (2001) ‘Integrating teaching and research through writing development for students and staff’ Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol 2, No 1, 31-45, ILT, Paul Chapman Publ.
• Mutch, A., (2003) ‘Exploring the practice of feedback to students’: Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol 4, No 1, 24-38, ILTHE, Sage
• Rust, C., A Briefing on Assessment of Large Groups: Assessment series No 12, York: LTSN Generic Centre
