Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The University of Hertfordshire is harnessing the capability of its e-submission system to enhance the consistency, fairness and transparency of marking and feedback in response to students’ comments. Enhancements to the system include features that address communication of key messages, the use of programme level grading criteria, and anonymous marking. The presentation will share the lessons learned during the course of the development and highlight the potential for impact on the student experience.
Citation preview
The use of technology to enhance the consistency, fairness and transparency of marking and feedbackJulie Vuolo, Learning and Teaching InstituteEmail: [email protected]
• The University is harnessing the capability of its e-submission system to enhance the consistency, fairness and transparency of marking and feedback in response to students’ comments
• Enhancements include features that address use of programme level grading criteria, communication of key messages and anonymous marking
• The presentation will share the lessons learned during the course of the development and highlight the potential for online submission technology to impact on the student experience.
ITEAM ProjectIntegrating Technology Enhanced AssessmentMethodsforStudent Support andSelf-regulation
Questionmark Perception
Electronic Submission &
Online feedback
Electronic Voting Systems
Student Progress
Dashboard.
Assessment for Learning
Assessment data
Performance &
Engagement
Self-regulation
and Support
Personal Tutor
Module Leader
Academic Skills Tutor
Programme Tutor
What the students said“Not all the lecturers mark the same way, some are fairer than others”“There was one module that I felt was unfairly marked”“Marking varies from tutor to tutor - for similar essay one student gets over 70% while the other one can get 40-50”“Marking of the assignments need to be consistent, even though they are moderated I still feel as if it is 'pot luck'”
Institutional response:•Every programme must publish grading criteria in the programme handbook•Grading criteria must relate to the University’s Grading Bands•Relevant grading criteria should be available for all assessments that students will encounter on the programme.
• Grading Criteria communicate the level of attainment expected of students and map them to particular grade bands.
• They can be specific to an assessment type or level or more general e.g. set at programme level.
Intention:• They are a resource for students looking to
understand what is expected of them when being assessed.
• They also provide a framework for feedback that ensures it is consistent, meaningful and fair.
What role does technology play?
System in place for one semester
What the students said“Having it each time makes a difference to how you do the next assignment” 3rd yr Business Management
“It helped me see what was wrong – I’d never read the feedback before” 3rd yr Business Management
“The grading criteria helped me see what kind of degree classification I might get - good grades spur me on” 2nd yr Nursing
“I didn’t read the words in the boxes on the grading criteria sheet” 2nd yr Nursing
“To be honest I’ve been a bit lazy about going back to the sheet to see where I went wrong” 3rd yr Business Administration
“I only looked at the top line of the sheet to see the requirements for a 1st 3rd yr Tourism
Which tells us…:• We need to explain the criteria and their
purpose to the students • We need to involve the students in the
development of criteria to ensure the words used are meaningful to them
• We need to tell them how to use them to develop their work
What else can we do to address fairness – anonymous marking?
‘Equality and fairness must lie at the heart of every aspect of the student experience, from admissions right through to assessment. NUS believes that where anonymous marking has not been introduced, institutions are leaving themselves susceptible to prejudice and perception of prejudice’.
‘Although anonymous marking is not a panacea for tackling discrimination it goes a long way to safeguarding students and improving confidence in assessment, marking and feedback’National Union of Students
Institutional response:• All summative assessments* must submitted and marked anonymously from September 2014.*unless subject to exemption
What role does technology play?
• Online assignments submission allows anonymous marking to be set up in advance
• Markers can be allocated (selected or randomised)
• Assignments are download in a zip file and marked
• Then automatically uploaded to the right place remaining anonymous
• Marks are then released and names revealed
Challenges• Who does the student contact if there is a problem
(without revealing their name) • Accidental ‘reveal’ of the author if the cursor
hovers over the file name• Students submitting when not eligible• Students putting their name on the footer of the
submission• Ensuring equity of process in hard copy submission• Loss of individualised and personalised support
Communicating key messages
• This is what your work will be marked against• This is when you can expect to get your
feedback• This is how we will ensure marking is fair• This is your feedback
What role does the technology play?What happens next?A member of the teaching staff will mark your coursework using the Grading Criteria, which are published in your programme documentation. How can I be sure the marking is fair?Your coursework work will be moderated - a sample of assignments is scrutinised by at least one other tutor to ensure the grades are fair, consistent and in line with the Grading Criteria. In some cases, your coursework work will be double marked - all assignments are marked by two tutors independently and a final mark is agreed. When will I receive feedback on my coursework?You should receive feedback on your coursework within four weeks of the submission deadline
What the student said
Message? What message?
What has the technology done?
• Provide a means of communicating standardised messages
• Provides a level of consistency of approach • Provide an audit trail for assessment and
feedback disputes • Moves responsibility for engagement with
feedback toward students
What can’t the technology do?• Determine the quality of content of uploaded
documents (e.g. grading criteria)• Take the place of verbal explanation or re-iteration• Anticipate every possible problem• Be human!• Respond to concerns, explain, re-assure,
encourage and clarify...• Engage with our students on a personal level
