Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Beyond teacher comments: Designing for student uptake of feedback

Beyond teacher comments: Designing for student uptake of feedback

  • Identifiez-vous pour voir les commentaires

Beyond teacher comments: Designing for student uptake of feedback

  1. 1. Beyond teacher comments: Designing for student uptake of feedback Professor David Carless, @CarlessDavid Faculty of Education, CETL Feedback Series, HKU, March 12, 2019 The University of Hong Kong
  2. 2. Overview 1. From telling to student involvement 2. Meeting students’ needs 3. Flipping feedback sequences 4. Designs for large classes The University of Hong Kong
  3. 3. Feedback is for students Students’ needs and preferences should be prioritized The University of Hong Kong
  4. 4. Student growth What are we hoping to achieve through feedback processes? The University of Hong Kong
  5. 5. Key aim of feedback processes To enhance student ability to self-monitor their work in progress The University of Hong Kong
  6. 6. The University of Hong Kong
  7. 7. Feedback challenges Too much feedback as telling Lack of engagement with feedback Lack of strategies for using feedback The way modules/feedback are organized The University of Hong Kong
  8. 8. Limits of Feedback as telling “Learners do not always learn much purely from being told, even when they are told repeatedly in the kindest possible way” (Sadler, 2015, p. 16) The University of Hong Kong
  9. 9. Student frustrations Feedback often comes at the end of teaching sequences and it is too late for students to act The University of Hong Kong
  10. 10. Survey evidence Students consistently express dissatisfaction with university feedback practices SLEQ SETL The University of Hong Kong
  11. 11. Feedback often seems like … … a perversely belated revelation of things that should have been made clear earlier (Crook, Gross & Dymott, 2006) The University of Hong Kong
  12. 12. Feedback graveyards The University of Hong Kong
  13. 13. DEFINING FEEDBACK The University of Hong Kong
  14. 14. Feedback as information Information about performance or understanding (Hattie & Timperley, 2007) The University of Hong Kong
  15. 15. Feedback as interaction All dialogue to support learning in both formal and informal situations (Askew & Lodge, 2000) The University of Hong Kong
  16. 16. Feedback as action Learners making sense of comments & using them for improvement (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Carless & Boud, 2018) The University of Hong Kong
  17. 17. Closing feedback loops It’s only feedback if students take some action The University of Hong Kong
  18. 18. Social constructivism Action on feedback is developed through learner agency, dialogue & co-construction The University of Hong Kong
  19. 19. Information  action (Winstone & Carless, 2019) The University of Hong Kong
  20. 20. The University of Hong Kong
  21. 21. RESEARCH BASE The University of Hong Kong
  22. 22. Differing perceptions Study 1. Questionnaire data from 460 staff & 1740 students Teachers thought their feedback was more useful than students did (Carless, 2006) The University of Hong Kong
  23. 23. Sustainable feedback Study 2. Interviews with 10 award-winning teachers from 10 different Faculties Sustainable feedback: Enhancing student role to generate & use feedback (Carless et al. 2011) The University of Hong Kong
  24. 24. Sustainable feedback defined Activities in which students generate & use feedback from peers, self or others as part of self-regulation (Carless, 2013) The University of Hong Kong
  25. 25. 5-year longitudinal inquiry Study 3. Longitudinal tracking of four students’ experiences of feedback (Carless, 2018) The University of Hong Kong
  26. 26. FOCUS ON THE STUDENTS The University of Hong Kong
  27. 27. Teacher-centred feedback Too much feedback is not aligned with students’ needs and interests The University of Hong Kong
  28. 28. Helping Students “Teachers could do more to identify students’ needs and find out how they can help us”. (Philippa, year 5) The University of Hong Kong
  29. 29. Feedback for better grades The main student consideration is the grade The University of Hong Kong
  30. 30. Centrality of grades “Teachers don’t see grades as being as important as students do.” (Philippa, year 5) The University of Hong Kong
  31. 31. Flipped feedback Inverting the sequence of guidance Students want more support during the assessment process … & less at its end The University of Hong Kong
  32. 32. Timing of critique “I welcome critical feedback when I can use it to improve my grade but critical feedback at the end is no use” (Candice, year 5) The University of Hong Kong
  33. 33. FEEDBACK LITERACY The University of Hong Kong
  34. 34. Defining student feedback literacy Understandings, capacities & dispositions needed to use feedback for improvement (Carless & Boud, 2018). The University of Hong Kong
  35. 35. Student feedback literacy The University of Hong Kong Making Judgments Appreciating Feedback Managing Affect Taking Action (Carless & Boud, 2018)
  36. 36. Teacher role Curriculum & assessment design to promote generating and using feedback The University of Hong Kong
  37. 37. Feedback designs Task 1  feedback  interlinked task 2 Position students as active feedback seekers & users The University of Hong Kong
  38. 38. Designs for large classes • Peer tutoring • Exemplars as guidance • Automated feedback e.g. quizzes • Group projects • Integrated sequences of rich tasks The University of Hong Kong
  39. 39. TECHNOLOGY-ENABLED FEEDBACK STRATEGIES The University of Hong Kong
  40. 40. Technology & feedback Pros: Immediacy, attractiveness, convenience, innovativeness Cons: Failure to implement sound feedback designs The University of Hong Kong
  41. 41. Screencast feedback Digital recording of users’ screen combined with voice narration The University of Hong Kong
  42. 42. Audio & Video feedback Rapport Nuance Personalisation Uptake & impact? The University of Hong Kong
  43. 43. Peer video feedback Peer-to-peer video feedback delivered via Facebook Hung (2016) The University of Hong Kong
  44. 44. Composing peer feedback Providing feedback more cognitively engaging than receiving feedback (e.g. Nicol et al., 2014) The University of Hong Kong
  45. 45. Implications The University of Hong Kong
  46. 46. Shifts in priorities The University of Hong Kong Increase Decrease Feedback on students’ needs Feedback on teachers’ priorities Within module guidance Terminal comments Comments on first task Comments on final task Feedback for first years Feedback for final year
  47. 47. Use resources wisely Reduce teacher commentary at times when it cannot reasonably be taken up (Boud & Molloy, 2013) The University of Hong Kong
  48. 48. (Wiliam, 2015) https://www.dylanwiliamcenter.com/feedback-for The University of Hong Kong “Feedback should be more work for the recipient than the donor”
  49. 49. Key recommendations Focus on learners’ needs Flip feedback processes Design for student uptake The University of Hong Kong
  50. 50. QUESTIONS & COMMENTS The University of Hong Kong
  51. 51. References Askew, S., & Lodge, C. (2000). Gifts, ping-pong and loops - linking feedback and learning. In S. Askew (Ed.), Feedback for Learning (pp.1-18). London: Routledge Falmer. Boud, D. & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712. Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219-233. Carless, D. (2013). Sustainable feedback and the development of student self-evaluative capacities. In S. Merry, M. Price, D. Carless & M.. Taras, (Eds.), Reconceptualising Feedback in Higher Education. London: Routledge. Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in University Assessment: Learning from award-winning practice. London: Routledge. Carless, D. (2018). Feedback loops and the longer-term: Towards feedback spirals. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1531108 Carless, D. & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354. The University of Hong Kong
  52. 52. References (continued) Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M. & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395-407. Crook, C., Gross, H. & Dymott, R. (2006). Assessment relationships in higher education: The tension of process and practice. British Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 95-114. Hung, S.-T. A. (2016). Enhancing feedback provision through multimodal video technology. Computers & Education, 98, 90-101. Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501-517. Nicol, D., Thomson, A. & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122. Sadler, D. R. (2010). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 535-550. Sadler, D.R. (2015). Backwards assessment explanations: Implications for teaching and assessment practice. In D. Lebler et al. (Eds.), Assessment in music education: From policy to practice (pp.9- 19). Cham: Springer. Winstone, N. & Carless, D. (2019, in press). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach. London: Routledge. The University of Hong Kong
  53. 53. THANK YOU The University of Hong Kong

×