Assessment and feedback study group project

An Investigation
into Formative A series of case
Feedback to studies from the
University of Salford
Enhance Student
Learning
Fabrizio Gallai,
Caroline Jones,
December 13
Udayangani Kulatunga
John McMahon 2011
Fiona Velez-Colby

Investigation into Formative Feedback to Enhance
Student Learning
A series of case studies from the University of
Salford
Introduction

In 2009 the University of Salford adopted a strategic plan which commits the institution to the achievement
of an upper quartile position in university league tables by 2017. Goal 1 in the strategic plan focuses on
learning and teaching; in particular, target 1.3 is to raise the recorded level in the National Student Survey
(NSS) for teaching quality, assessment and feedback, and organisation and management. It is therefore clear
that assessment and feedback play a central role in the University’s new plan. This also mirrors what Biggs
and Tang (2007: 97) state, i.e. “so important is formative feedback that the effectiveness of any particular
teaching/learning activity can be judged by how well it provides feedback to students as they learn.”

Following group discussion relating to specific feedback and assessment practices engaged by all group
members it was felt the area most relevant to all members would be the examination of formative feedback
as it is directly related to both the experiences and professional issues faced by the five group members (UK
PSF AoA 3, 6). Each group member chose a particular aspect of formative feedback according to a study
carried out by the LTSN Generic Centre (now Higher Education Academy) on Student Enhanced Learning
through Effective Feedback (SENLEF) to “develop a resource for practitioners wishing to improve their
feedback practice to students or get some new ideas on how to enhance their current practice” (Juwah,
Macfarlane-Dick, Matthew, Nicol, Ross & Smith 2004: 2).

Seven principles for good effective practice were identified as a result of this project. These are listed below
(Juwah, Macfarlane-Dick, Matthew, Nicol, Ross and Smith 2004: 2):

1. Facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning.
2. Encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning.
3. Helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, and expected standards).
4. Provides opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance.
5. Delivers high quality information to students about their learning.
6. Encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem.
7. Provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching.

The range of subjects taught, teaching styles prior to the case studies and methods feedback methods
employed by our action learning set are listed below. The diverse list clearly shows how the good feedback

practices identified for the purpose of this investigation can be employed across a wide range of subject
areas and learning environments throughout Higher Education (Stefani and Nicol 1997).

• Sports Science - Strength and Conditioning Levels 5 & 6 - Method of delivery practical involving small
group tasks (approx 20 per session put in groups of 4-5) focusing on weightlifting technique and
coaching, including the student's ability to give feedback (i.e. Proficiency in coaching) - Case study
investigating Principle No 1.

• Quantity Surveying Discipline Project Year 2 / Level 5 - Teaching style previous to case study was large
group lecturing (approx 85 full-time and 50 part-time). Formative feedback methods were online test
with immediate results, but no dialogue with lecturer - Case study investigating Principle No2.
•Social Policy - Research Methods Level 4 - Method of delivery seminars of approx 25-30 students with 2
assignments within the module. Formative feedback about assignments is given during the seminars -
Case study investigating Principle No 3.

• Italian Language - Italian Written Language Level 4 - Method of delivery is typically seminars of approx
10-15 students with 1 formative mid semester feedback in verbal form, 1 written formative feedback
and 1 summative feedback in written format - Case study investigating Principle No 6.
•Design Management Year 3 / Level 6 - Method of delivery prior to the case study was small group
lecturing (approx 8-10) using verbal formative feedback relating to the written assignment during
individual tutorials. - Case study investigating Principle No 7.

Each member of the group identified one of the7 principles of good feedback practice as identified in the
Student Enhanced Learning through Effective Feedback (SENLEF) project in 2004 (Juwah et al. 2004).
Individually the group analysed one of the principles on good feedback practice by engaging with literature
specifically focusing on one particular aspect of formative feedback, the results of each specific case study
follow:

In-Class Peer Feedback and Self-Assessment (Reflection)
John McMahon
School of Health, Sport and Rehabilitation Sciences

Aim and objectives
Aim: To encourage and facilitate in-class peer verbal feedback and self-assessment of learning in order to
enhance student learning and achievement (UKPSF-AoA3)

Objectives:

• to introduce students to self-assessment of learning
• to enhance student engagement with peer verbal feedback
• to facilitate constant reflection of in-class performance
• to encourage students to direct their own learning outcomes

Background
One of the seven principles of good feedback practice is that it should “Facilitate the development of self-
assessment (reflection) in learning” (Juwah et al. 2004; Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006). Self-assessment can
significantly enhance both learning and achievement, when appropriately organised within the Higher
Education setting (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006). Research showed that students who were given self-
assessment training over the course of the academic year significantly improved their performance during
end-of-year examinations (McDonald and Boud 2003). Integrating internal (student) and external (tutor
and/or peer) feedback was found to be an extremely beneficial method of delivering self-assessment
training and one which was favoured by the participating students (Taras 2003).

The general consensus among authors within self-assessment literature is that too much emphasis placed on
tutor assessment (as is commonly associated with Higher Education) may decrease students’ ability to self-
assess and self-correct, by increasing their reliance on others (Juwah et al. 2004). Therefore, self-assessment
training would provide students with the skills to effectively judge how their work relates to the identified
standards and criteria (Boud 1986). Furthermore, it has been suggested that if self-assessment training was
to be provided for the entire duration of an undergraduate programme, it would effectively prepare

students for lifelong learning (Boud 2000).

Self-assessment is considered to be an evolution towards a more inclusive democratic learning environment
(Somervell 1993; Dearing 1997) as it promotes greater equality of power between teachers and students
(Taras 2008), which has been shown to enhance student learning (Black and William 1998; Nicol and
Macfarlane-Dick 2006). It is also postulated that self-assessment provides inclusivity among students from
any level and/or stage of the assessment process (Taras 2008). Finally, it has been theorised that competent
and resourceful use of self-assessment is the only paradigm which enables students to develop essential
skills for professional practice (Boud 1995; Taras 2001).

In order to develop students’ self-assessment skills, it has been suggested that teachers should provide them
with more structured opportunities for developing their capacity for self-monitoring and judging their
progression towards pre-determined goals (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006). This can be achieved either
through peer assessment and feedback (Boud et al. 1999; Gibbs 1999) and/or through the implementation
of regular in-class self-reflection opportunities (Cowan 1999).

Evaluation
To assess whether level six Sports Science students perceived in-class peer verbal feedback and self-
assessment of learning to enhance their learning, a questionnaire (Appendix 1) was completed by them
(UKPSF-CK5), following their final taught session of semester one.

Table 1: Questionnaire answers expressed as a percentage

Q Somewhat Quite a lot Very much

1 50 50
2 50 50
3 17 33 50
4 50 50
5 33 33 33
6 33 33 33
7 17 50 33
8 50 50
9 50 50
Total 12 44 44

The results of the questionnaire are presented in Table 1. The results suggest that students perceived in-
class peer verbal feedback and self-assessment of learning to be a positive and valued process, with 88% of
the class selecting ‘quite a lot’ and ‘very much’ as answers for the majority of questions listed in Appendix 1.
However, there was a trend towards students perceiving peer in-class feedback to be of greater benefit to
their learning when compared to self-assessment (reflection).

Positive aspects (for students)

• Giving/receiving in-class peer verbal feedback facilitated coaching and technique
• Regular in-class self-assessment (reflection) facilitated coaching and technique
• The majority of students think that they will continue to give/receive in-class peer verbal feedback and
self-assess (reflect) for their continuing professional development

Positive aspects (for teachers)

• Allows teachers to become facilitators rather than dictators of student learning
• Provides teachers with a method of assessing understanding during each session
• Enables a greater amount of content to be delivered during each session
• Provides teachers with opportunities to create dialogue around the topic areas

Negative aspects

• When first introduced, some students took time to effectively engage and feel comfortable with giving
and receiving peer verbal feedback and regularly reflecting

Lessons learnt
The implications of this case study for teaching practice are that in-class peer verbal feedback and self-
assessment of learning can enhance student learning and achievement, by enhancing their ability to
effectively judge their performance and progression towards pre-defined goals.

What would I change when carrying out this in the future?
I would introduce these methods at the beginning of the semester, or preferably when the students
commence their undergraduate studies, rather than part-way through, in order to encourage engagement
with these methods for a longer overall duration and allow time for them to develop the necessary skills,
particularly in self-assessment, in order for them to participate in these tasks more effectively.

Good practice and transferability
When appropriately introduced, regular in-class peer verbal feedback and self-assessment (reflection) of
learning opportunities can positively influence learning and achievement, especially in a practical setting. I

believe that these methods can effectively transfer across a range of subject areas; however, future research
is required in order to test this hypothesis.

Further information and references

• Black, P. and William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning, Assessment in Education: Principles
Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
• Boud, D. (1986). Implementing Student Self-Assessment
(Sydney, Higher Education Research and
Development Society of Australia).
• Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. London: Kogan Page.
• Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning society, Studies in
Continuing Education, 22(2), 151-167.
• Boud, D., Cohen, R. and Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment, Assessment and Evaluation i
Higher Education, 24(4), 413-426.
• Cowan, J. (1999). Being an innovative university teacher (Buckingham, SRHE & Open University Press).
• Dearing, Sir R. (1997). Higher education in learning and society. London: HMSO.
• Gibbs, G. (1999). Using assessment strategically to change the way students learn, in: S. Brown and A.
Glasner (Eds) Assessment Matters in Higher Education: Choosing and Using Diverse Approaches
(Buckingham, SRHE/Open University Press).
• Juwah, C., Macfarlane-Dick, D., Matthew, B., Nichol, D., Ross, D., and Smith, B. (2004). Enhancing Studen
Learning Through Effective Formative Feedback. York: The Higher Education Academy.
• McDonald, B. and Boud, D. (2003). The impact of self-assessment on achievement: the effects of self-
assessment training on performance in external examinations, Assessment in Education, 10(2), 209-220.
•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), 199-218.
•Somervell, H. (1993). Issues in assessment, enterprise and higher education: the case for self, peer and
collaborative assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(3), 221-233.
•Taras, M. (2001). The use of tutor feedback and student self-assessment in summative assessment tasks:
towards transparency for students and for tutors. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(6),
606-614.

• Taras, M. (2003). To feedback or not to feedback in student self-assessment. Assessment and Evaluation
in Higher Education, 28(5), 549-565.
• Taras, M. (2008). Issues of power and equity in two models of self-assessment. Teaching in Higher
Education, 13(1), 81-92.

Appendix 1: Feedback Questionnaire: In-Class Peer Feedback and Self-Assessment

Q Questions regarding your perception of peer feedback Not Some- Quite a Very
and self-assessment in Advanced S&C really what lot much

1 Do you think that giving feedback to your peers
facilitated the development of your coaching?

2 Do you think that receiving feedback from your peers
facilitated the development of your coaching?

3 Do you think that giving feedback to your peers
facilitated the development of your exercise technique?

4 Do you think that receiving feedback from your peers
facilitated the development of your exercise technique?

5 Do you think that self-assessing (reflecting upon) your
coaching facilitated the development of your subsequent
coaching practice?

6 Do you think that self-assessing (reflecting upon) your
exercise technique facilitated the development of your
subsequent exercise technique?

7 Do you think it was beneficial to receive peer-feedback
from the entire class at once?

8 Do you think you will continue to give and receive peer-
feedback as part of your continuing professional
development as a coach?

9 Do you think you will continue to self-assess (reflect
upon) as part of your continuing professional
development as a coach?

10 Are there any other comments that you would like to make with regards to your perception of
peer-feedback and self-assessment as it applies to S&C coaching?

Formative Feedback to Encourage teacher and peer dialogue around learning
Udayangani Kulatunga
Quantity Surveying, School of the Built Environment

Feedback for student learning can take many forms and from many parties including teacher, peer, external
assessors. Based on the feedback received for a task, learners can evaluate, self-correct and progress their
work to produce a good outcome (Juwah et al. 2004). One of the main advantages of feedback is the
discussion forum which feedback linked to. The dialogue created between teachers and peers around
learning has been identified as one of the seven principles of good feedback. As asserted by (Juwah et al.
2004), to increase effectiveness of feedback, it needs to be provided as a dialogue rather than information
transmission. Hyland (2000) views that often learners do not understand the feedback provided to them.
Cox (1987) identifies lack of time given for students to consolidate their learning during their lectures. Due to
the time pressures in completing the module content, teachers tend to rush their lecture without providing
opportunity for students to reflect on their learning. However, when a dialogue is created around feedback,
the tendency of learners understanding feedback can be improved. The dialogue created around feedback
facilitates students to go into deep discussions not only around the particular task given by the teacher but
generally around a subject matter. The possibility of creating such effective dialogue based on the subject
matter is being identified by Freemen and Lewis (1998) as a positive impact of feedback. Nicol and Boyle
(2003) notes that the dialogue created between students and teachers can provide a good platform for
teacher managed discussions. Further, such dialogue provides students to immediately correct their mis-
concepts, misunderstandings about a subject matter (Juwah et al. 2004).
One of the interactive teaching methods that I used for my teaching create dialogue between teacher and
students. Interactive teaching encourages students to behave and feel more engaged with the lecturer and
peers without simply attending a lecture as a passive recipient (Light and Cox 2001). Light and Cox (2001)
further identify that interactive teaching as a mode of addressing “social dimension” of learning by helping
to create an environment where staff and students work together while creating a good dialogue between
them. The interactive learning method that I used was the Qwizdom clicker system. Hoffman and Goodwin
(2006) view that student learning is improved by responding to questions answered using clickers and
subsequent discussions carried out in the class based on them. These discussions were not only targeted at
the questions post, but also lead to deep learning around the subject matter.

Qwizdom voting system as a method of formative feedback

Aim and objectives
Aim: To improve teaching and learning with the use of Technology Enhanced Learning methods used in the
higher education (UK PSF-CK4)

Objectives:

• to create an effective dialogue between students and teachers around the subject matter
• to improve student engagement for learning
• to evaluate student’s understanding of the subject matter
• to provide formative feedback for students on the regular (weekly) basis
• to address the issue of late arriving students without repeating subject matter that’s being already
discussed

Background
Qwizdom voting system was used as a formative feedback method for UG year 2 fulltime and part-time
students who are following Quantity Surveying degree programme. Qwizdom device was used at the
beginning of the session for the “re-cap” session that lasted for about 15-20 minutes. The questions mainly
targeted the content of the previous lecture. This provided a good understanding for both the student and
tutor about student’s knowledge and understanding about the subject content. Qwizdon is capable of
producing graphical illustrations based on the answers given by the student (% of correct and wrong
answers) which provided a good basis for students to compare themselves against class average
performance. Further, final questions of the Qwizdom session were focused on the current lecture of the
day. After each question, a feedback dialogue was created regarding the questions. This dialogue provided a
good basis for student and tutor to discuss about the subject matter in general.

Evaluation
The impact of this initiative was measured by distributing and evaluating a questionnaire to students
(UKPSF- CK5). The questions were prepared by using a Likert scale (Appendix 1). Following positive and
negative aspect of this initiative was obtained.


• Interactive nature of the subject

• Improve understanding of the subject matter
• Effective feedback discussions leading to previous and current lecture
• Effective feedback discussions leading to overall subject matter
• Anonymously of providing answers to questions
• Evaluating students’ position in terms of the overall class performance


• Provide opportunity for the teacher to create dialogue around the subject matter
• Provide feedback on the student understanding
• Provide feedback on the level of understanding of different students (PT and FT)

Negative aspects

• Technical difficulties when running the system

Lessons learnt

• This was the first time Qwizdom device was used for the lecturer and it was started during the 6th week
of the lecture series. Therefore, expectations and standard that would be expected from the students
were not in place. Accordingly, for the next semester, expectations and standards will be set up from the
very beginning of lecturers.

What would I change when carrying out this in the future:

• Facilitate the use of Qwizdom device within pairs or between three students. This will also help to create
discussions within group of students which will further enhance learning. Crouch and Mazur (2001) note
that peer discussions help students to develop their knowledge significantly. Similarly, Light and Cox
(2001) assert that areas difficult for the lecturer to help students to learn are better learned though peer
discussions.

• Would explore more literature to ascertain best types of questions that suite Qwizdom

Preparation of Qwizdom questions requires commitment and time, however, the student engagement is
very positive for this initiative. I believe this method is transferable across the university. It is expected to
share this knowledge during the scholarship week of the School of the Built Environment.


• Cox, K, 1987, Knowledge which cannot be used is useless, Medical Teacher 9, 145-154
• Freeman, R. and Lewis, R. (1998) Planning and Implementing Assessment. London: Kogan Page.
• Hoffman, C., & Goodwin, S. (2006). A clicker for your thoughts: Technology for active learning. New
Library World, 107(1228/1229), pp 422-433.
• Hyland, P. (2000) Learning from feedback on assessment. In Booth, A. and Hyland, P. (eds.), The practice
of university history teaching. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
• Juwah, C., Macfarlane-Dick, D., Matthew, B., Nichol, D., Ross, D., and Smith, B. (2004). Enhancing Student

• Light G and Cox R (2003) Learning and Teaching in higher education, SAGE, London
• Nicol, D.J. and Boyle, J.T. (2003) Peer Instruction versus Class-wide Discussion in large classes: a
comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom. Studies in Higher Education 28 (4), 457-
473.

Appendix 1: Feedback Questionnaire: Use of Qwizdom remote voting system

Please identify the level of your agreement for the below questions.

Neither agree nor disagree

Strongly disagree
Strongly agree

Disagree
Agree
The use of Qwizdom voting system

1 Increased my engagement at the class

2 Improved my understanding of the subject matter

3 Increased discussions based on the subject matter

4 Motivated me to provide answer due to its Anonymous nature

5 Evaluated my position within the class average performance

6 Improved learning

7 Directed me for the areas that I need to study

8 Time consuming

9 Has technical difficulties when setting up

10 Other

Helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, expected standards).
Caroline Jones
Research Methods , Social Policy

According to Sadler and Black and William, “students can only achieve a learning goal if they understand
that goal, assume some ownership of it, and can assess progress” (cited in Juwah et al. 2004:8). Juwah et al
cite various studies which found that students’ ideas of what was required for the assignment differed
considerably from their tutors. This is a problem which has affected me recently, although the assignment to
which it relates produces the same issue every year. The assessment is the first one the Year 4 students
have. It is for Research Methods, and it is a literature review. Every year, we all patiently explain what is
required and how a literature review differs from an essay. We explain it again. And again. And again. Every
year, we are presented with the finished assignments, and every year, about half to three quarters of the
pieces are essays, not literature reviews. Each year, the assessment description is modified in an attempt to
make it easier to understand, but each year, the result is more or less the same. The problem seems to be
that the students just do not understand what is expected of them. They have usually come from college
where they have written essays. They have come to university expecting to write essays, yet the first thing
they are expected to write is not an essay.

Juwah et al suggest: “Weak and incorrect conceptions of goals not only influence what students do but also
the value of feedback information” (2004:9), explaining that if the misunderstanding about what was
expected is huge, then it “will be difficult for students to evaluate gaps between required and actual
performance” (2004:9). In many ways, the feedback my students receive afterwards is pointless, partly for
these reasons and partly because some of them will never be asked to write a literature review again, and
those that are will not be expected to do this until Level 6.

One way around this is to provide “written documents embodying descriptive statements that externalise
assessment goals and the standards that define different levels of achievement” (2004:9). However, Juwah
et al go on to explain that this has been shown not to work, which is certainly borne out by my experiences.
Even verbal explanations do not help greatly, according to these studies, which again is my experience.
One solution to my own problem might be to change the assignments around so that the Literature Review
is not the first thing the students are faced with. Hopefully, by the time they come to it, they will be better
equipped to understand what is being asked. The counter argument to this is that a literature review is a
building block on which most research is conducted, so it makes logical sense to address it first. Also, if
Juwah et al’s findings are correct (2004), it would not make much difference where in the course the

literature review was situated. Dropping the assignment completely in favour of something else, is another
option but one that is not within my remit at the present time.

Juwah et al’s suggestion is the use of exemplars (2004), examples of what is required—in this case, of
literature reviews. This is something I will be suggesting to the module leaders. I think that it could make a
huge difference to the students’ understanding of what a literature review actually it. It is a simple solution,
yet I am confident that it will be very effective. Seeing an example can work so much better than even the
best explanation and is a technique I use a lot to great effect on another course I teach on. In fact, I cannot
believe that I have not thought of transferring that idea from the other course to this one.

Other suggestions include letting the student’s mark each other’s work and holding workshops where
assignments are devised in collaboration with the students. These are also good ideas and are things I will be
thinking about in the future.

Blended (oral and written) method of formative feedback
Fabrizio Gallai
School of Languages

Aim and objectives
Aim: To motivate students by adopting a joint oral and written method of feedback and, in turn, helping to
achieve elements of equality and diversity (UK PSF PV1)

Objectives:

• to enhance student motivation and self-esteem
• to enhance student engagement with learning
• to assess students’ understanding of the subject matter
• to improve equality and diversity by catering for different learning requirements

Background
A key outcome of the self-regulation and feedback model (Juwah, Macfarlane-Dick, Matthew, Nicol, Ross
and Smith 2004; Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick 2006) is the set of principles and focus questions indicating what
good assessment and feedback should do. In particular, I have focused on the principle which states that
feedback should “encourage positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem”.

Research has shown that such a blended (oral and written) formative feedback approach leads to
improvements in levels of attainment (Black and Wiliam 1998) an it is also not difficult to see the positive
effect that it can have on levels of student motivation.

Evaluation
The impact of this initiative was measured by distributing a questionnaire (UKPSF- CK5) to second year
students (Appendix 1) on the feedbacks received for their first Italian written formative assessment (Writing
a covering letter in Italian). The first (oral) feedback was on the first draft of the formative assignment,
whereas the second (written) feedback was on the final version of the written formative assessment.
Such questionnaires “have reasonable levels of validity” (Gibbs 2010: 27). The questions are based on Table
2 on Formative Feedback Guidelines to Enhance Learning (Things to Do) drawn from Shute’s (2007: 30) paper
entitled Focus on Formative Feedback). In particular, the answers to question 8 (Did the feedback emphasise
that effort yields increased learning and performance and that mistakes are an important part of the
learning process?) were the following;

Not really: 0% A bit: 2% Quite a bit: 18% Very much: 80%

This shows that external feedback mainly has a (very) positive effect on motivational beliefs and on self-
esteem. It influences how students feel about themselves which, in turn, affects what and how they learn.
Lastly this highlights the following positive and negative aspects of this feedback method:


• Lead to detailed feedback discussion
• Enhance understanding of overall subject matter through motivation and self-esteem
• Improve students’ subsequent interest in learning and performance


• Provide opportunity for the teacher to exchange views
• Provide feedback on student understanding
• Provide feedback on the level of understanding of individual students

Negative aspects

• Combining verbal and written feedback takes time
• Students might not be willing to receive feedback twice

Lessons learnt
The implication of this case study for teaching practice is that motivation and self-esteem are likely to be
enhanced when a course has low-stakes tasks with formative feedback geared to providing information
regarding progress and achievement. Combining oral and written feedback means that students who have a
tendency to compare themselves against others - rather than to focus on the difficulties in the task - will
have fewer chances to do so.

What would I change when carrying out this in the future:
Aspects that I would change to encourage high levels of motivation to succeed include:
(1) giving marks on final written assignment only after students have responded to feedback comments;
(2) giving time for students to re-write selected pieces of work according to written feedback;
(3) some forms of peer- and self-assessment can be useful if these are well structured and use clear criteria.

Preparation of both oral and written feedback requires time. However, if we are to raise the levels of
achievement of the students, then we should be keen to develop our own practice in this area and provide
students with overwhelmingly positive experiences of the assessment process.
In addition to these benefits to student identified above, the use of the survey has benefited my practice. It
has helped me to engage with the students and find out more about their learning needs.
Transferable practices are:
- oral and/or written feedback on a formatively assessed work midway through the semester;
- alternatively a short piece of summatively assessed work may be completed for feedback.


• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5 (1), 7-74.
• Gibbs, G. (2010) The assessment of group work: lessons from the literature. Oxford: Assessment
Standards Knowledge Exchange. Available from:
www.brookes.ac.uk/aske/documents/Brookes%20groupwork%20/Gibbs%20Dec%2009.pdf [November
2011].
• Juwah, C., Macfarlane-Dick, D., Matthew, B., Nichol, D., Ross, D., and Smith, B. (2004). Enhancing Student
• 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), 199-218.

• Shute, V. J. (2007). Focus on formative feedback. ETS Research Report, RR-07-11 (pp. 1-47), Princeton, NJ

Appendix 1: Feedback questionnaire

Italian Written Language - 2nd Year
Course Assignment 1 (Write a Covering Letter)
Student Evaluation on Formative Feedback

Looking at the Formative Feedback given on your first course assignment (Write a Covering Letter), I would
welcome your experience, evaluation and any suggestion for improvement.
- Please rate the items by placing an X in the appropriate column:

Not A bit Quite a Very
really bit much
1 Did the feedback address specific features of your work in
relation to the task, with suggestions on how to improve?

2 Did the feedback describe the what, how, and/or why of a
given problem?
3 Did you feel that the feedback was elaborated in small
enough pieces so that it was not too overwhelming?

4 Were the feedback messages specific and clear?
5 Was the feedback simple and focused?
6 Did the feedback clarify goals and seek to reduce or
remove uncertainty in relation to how well you are
performing on the task and what needs to be
accomplished to attain the goals?
7 Was the feedback unbiased and objective?
8 Did the feedback emphasise that effort yields increased
learning and performance and that mistakes are an
important part of the learning process?

9 Did the feedback note areas of strength and provide
information on how to improve?
10 Was the feedback too controlling or critical?

Are there any other comments you would like to make about the formative feedback?

Feedback provides information to teachers that can be used to shape their teaching
Fiona Velez-Colby
Design Futures, School of Art and Design

Literature Review
The importance of formative feedback is well documented, and can be argued as the educational
intervention that has the most impact on a student’s learning (Gibbs 2010), a factor strengthened when it is
delivered quickly and efficiently to students (Angelo and Cross 1990). However good feedback does not only
benefit the student but also provides the teacher with information about the learning styles and level of
subject understanding of individual students, this information can then be used to improve the teaching
being delivered to the student (Yorke 2003).

Teachers can effectively use formative feedback given to students to formulate a reactive response to their
individual learning needs. However in order to be produce relevant feedback to students, teachers need
good data about how students are progressing (Juwah 2010) both in terms of their subject understanding
and their study skills. To use this information effectively teachers must establish practices to digest the data
and then incorporate this information into the teaching of that individual student or group of students; the
process of reviewing and altering their teaching has to be immediate (Angelo and Cross 1990) and must be
delivered to the same cohort. Strategies that enable teachers to both provide regular and immediate
feedback to students also allow both parties to share their concepts of teaching and learning on a regular
basis (Juwah 2010) which has the effect of aiding the teacher to support the student’s ability to engage in
independent learning and develop their understanding of what their role in the learning process should be
(Gibbs 2010).

Investigation into the effectiveness of formative feedback to directly shape teaching
Testing Principle 7 - Feedback provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape their teaching
(Juwah et al. 2004.)

Aims and objectives
The specific aims of this case study are to ascertain whether or not in instances where formative feedback is
used to directly shape the teaching it has;

• Increased the student's understanding of the subject
• Improved teaching on the module
• Met the individual learning styles of each student
• Provided an environment that facilitates them becoming independent learners

Background
I have observed that much of the learning I have engaged with on the PGCAP has influenced my perspective
on methods of teaching and has allowed for the integration of my learning and research with steps taken to
facilitate deeper learning by the students (UK PSF AoA 4&5). Much of the research on the subject of using
classroom assessment techniques acknowledges that 'Formative Classroom Assessment's purpose is to
improve the quality of student learning, not to provide evidence for evaluating or grading students. The
assessment is almost never graded and are almost always anonymous' (Angelo and Cross. 1990), therefore
information generated about the student learning can be used to directly adjust teaching to address any
gaps in not only subject matter, but also study skills and ability (Juwah et al. 2004), as well as providing
information to the students about their work.

Scale of Case Study
This case study has focuses on one module of the BA Hons Design Futures course. The module is an elected
module with a total of 8 students enrolled on it. The study was implemented to coincide with the start of the
PGCAP, so has been running since Oct 2011. The changes made to the module delivery methods, the
development of student evaluation forms and the analysis of findings after each stage of formative feedback
has been conducted in my own time with an aim of improving my teaching and to use the knowledge gained
on the PGCAP to inform my teaching practice (UK PSF AoA 5 & 6) and not as part of a programme level
investigation.

Investigation the effectiveness of using formative feedback to directly shape teaching
The module structure has traditionally been a 12 week taught programme of 7 lectures, 4 individual tutorials
evenly dispersed at weeks 3, 5, 8 & 10 and 1 guest speaker lecture in week 12. The module had 2
submissions, both written assignments of approximately 3000 words each, one at week 7 and one at week
12. The content is reviewed and updated every year prior to delivery, however the methods of delivery
remained essentially unchanged. During the revision process of last year’s module I decided that the
submission requirements would be changed to one written submission and the assignment would require a
greater level of independent investigation and enable students to engage with the subject matter in a more
personalised manner, thereby supporting independent learning and encouraging the development of an
attitude of responsibility towards their own learning (Gibbs 2010) (Stefani and Clarke 2000).

The module structure was changed during the course of the semester in response to issues identified during
the first few weeks of teaching after discussion with Chrissi Nerantzi, Lisa Thomas (Design Futures

Programme Leader) and my introduction to concepts dealing with student learning and individual needs
which were not previously considered when designing my module delivery methods (UK PSF AoA 5 & 6 / CK
3,4 & 5 / PV 1, 4 & 5). A concern that the delivered content was failing to sufficiently facilitate the student's
(successful) completion of the assignments was the motivation for this case study and decision to use
formative feedback as a method to influence the teaching on this module.

The final module structure delivered to the students consisted of;
Weeks 1 & 2 - Lectures as previously delivered in 2010 but with updated content.
Week 3 - Individual tutorials following the submission of a draft project proposal.
Week 4 - Set of 30 minute mini-lectures with brainstorming sessions to produce Mind-maps with discussion
after each mini-lecture.
Week 5 - Presentation of project proposals to class followed by peer and tutor assessment. Each
presentation and subsequent feedback session was videoed, then posted onto the VLE for students to view.
Week 6 - 50/50 Lecture followed by group activity based on delivered content.
Week 7 - Lecture as previously delivered in 2010 but with updated content.
Week 8 - Individual tutorials to discuss project progress (no draft reading).
Week 9 - PBL Session - with step by step guidance from tutor, concluding with evaluation of the learning
achieved against desired learning outcomes.
Week 10 - Presentation of project progress followed by peer and tutor assessment. Each presentation and
subsequent feedback session was recorded, then posted onto the VLE for students to view.
Week 11 - 50/50 Lecture and PBL session - format was designed in response to student evaluation of Week 9
PBL session.
Week 12 - Guest speaker/workshop session.
(All old/unaltered content shown in italics)

Evaluation
A questionnaire using a Likert scale was used to evaluate the success of these student centred and
interactive methods of delivering the content and the benefits to the students of gaining immediate
formative feedback from both their peers and tutor about their individual assignments. The evaluation forms
can be found in Appendix 1 and 2.

Student Presentations and Peer / Tutor Feedback - 2 sessions, total attendance over the 2
sessions was total of10 students - 60% response rate

5 Definitely agree
4 Mostly agree
3 Neither agree nor disagree
2 Mostly disagree
1 Definitely disagree
N/A Not applicable 5 4 3 2 1
1. I understand the concepts explained
in this module. 4 1 1 … …
2. I understand the objectives of this
session. 3 3 … … …
3. Presenting my ideas helped me
clarify my assignment objectives. 3 3 … … …
4. Getting feedback from my peers
helps my learning. 4 2 … … …
5. There are enough additional
resources to support my learning. 4 1 1 … …
6. There is enough support from the
lecturer 4 1 1 … …
7. The lecturer is enthusiastic about
what they are teaching. 5 1 … … …
8. The lectures are intellectually
stimulating. 5 1 … … …
9. The lectures are too difficult for me
to understand ... … ... 1 5
Personal development
10. The lecture has helped me to
present myself with confidence. 3 3 ... … …
11. My communication skills have
improved. 3 2 1 … …
12. As a result of the lecture, I feel
confident in tackling unfamiliar
problems. 2 3 1 … …
Table 1.
Student’s comments on the presentation and feedback session are listed in Appendix 3.
Number of times students accessed video and audio files of their personal feedback
Video
Recordings Presentation Feedback
No of
No of views views
Student 1 2 3
Student 2 3 2
Student 3 9 12
Student 4 5 13
Student 5

Table 2.

Audio Recordings No of listens

Student 1 2

Student 2 2

Student 3 0

Student 4 0

Student 5 0
Table 3.

Results of presentations and peer / tutor feedback evaluation forms, student comments and
viewings of feedback sessions
From the results gained from the evaluation forms from student presentations and the comments made the
following assessments can be made;

• 100% of students found it beneficial to present their project progress to the tutor and other students.
• 100% of students found it helped their understanding of their investigations to get formative feedback
from the tutor and their peers.

The students seemed to gain confidence and improve their communication skills in presenting their work
and also benefited from alternative points of view relating to their own established perspectives about their
work.

• 80% of students watched their initial presentation session and the video feedback from tutor and peers.
• A total of 49 viewings of the presentation sessions and the video feedback sessions were completed.
•40% of students listened to the audio recordings of their presentations and feedback sessions.

• A total of 4 listens of the audio recordings were completed.

Although not all students listened back to the recordings of video and audio feedback, most did and
therefore it can be assumed (by the multiple views) that it was beneficial to their understanding of their
projects.

There are also 2 other assumptions than can be made;

• The students much preferred the video feedback to the audio feedback.
• The formative feedback gained earlier on in the module (i.e. the video feedback) was much more helpful
to their investigations than the formative feedback received much nearer to the hand-in date of their
investigations (i.e. the audio feedback).

Although these 2 statements appear to be in contrast with each other it is possible that they are both
applicable as each student has individual learning needs, preferences of the way in which they learn and also
the level of support they need even when they are all engaging in the same learning task (Cho and Forde
2001). In order to meet the needs of a diverse group of students it will be necessary for tutors to
acknowledge the individuality of the students and design the delivery of modules to meet these needs, as
Cho and Forde state; 'Faculty need to provide multiple methodologies for students to learn each new
subject or problem... University teachers can no longer function solely as authoritative theoretical expe
who dictate abstract concepts and problems to their students' (2001:89).

PBL Session - 1 session, attendance was total of 5 students - 80% response rate

5 Definitely agree
4 Mostly agree
2 Mostly disagree
N/A Not applicable 5 4 3 2 1
1. I understand the concepts explained in this
module. 4 … … … …
2. I feel this session has allowed for deeper
learning than a traditional lecture. 3 ... … 1 …
3. Investigating the learning objectives in this way
has helped me understand the content better. 1 2 1 … …
4. The PBL session has made me understand the
subject of corporate identity 1 3 … … …
5. I feel there are areas of the subject I have not
learnt enough about. … 2 … 2 …

6. There was enough guidance from the lecturer 1 2 1 … …
7. The lecturer is enthusiastic about what they are
teaching 3 1

8. This session was intellectually stimulating. 3 1 … … …
9. The session makes the subject difficult for me
to understand 1 1 2
10. The session has helped me to present myself
with confidence. 2 1 1 … …

11. My communication skills have improved. 1 2 1 … …
12. As a result of the session, I feel confident in
tackling unfamiliar problems. 1 3 ... ...
Table 4.

Student’s comments on the PBL session are listed in Appendix 4

Results of PBL session evaluation forms
From the results on the student evaluation forms of the PBL session the following assessments can be made:

• 100% of students felt they understood the subject being investigated, although this result could be
skewed by the previous year’s lectures given on (the subject of) corporate identity and image.
•75% of students felt the PBL structure allowed for deeper learning than a traditional lecture.
•25% of students felt the PBL structure did not allow for deeper learning than a traditional lecture.

Therefore this it can be assumed that although most students found the PBL session helped their learning,
some of the students felt that it was not beneficial to their learning. These findings are further reinforced by
the following results:

• 50% of students felt there were areas of the subject they had not learnt.
• 25% of students felt that the session format made it difficult to understand the subject.

It is also clear that the difference in the students’ abilities to take control of their own learning is quite varied
within even this small sample of students. Initially most of them seemed daunted by the PBL task although
some took on the challenge and ultimately benefitted from this alternative method of learning. However
those students who felt they had not really benefitted from the session were placed at a disadvantage. In
order to compensate for this, the subsequent PBL session in Week 11 was split with a more traditional
lecture style delivery of content relevant to the PBL activity that followed. This allowed for all the students to
engage with the learning without anyone benefitting more than another. Anecdotal evaluation gathered
from the students at the end of the Week 11 session showed that the majority of students (6 out of 7) felt
this had been the most successful of the delivered sessions, with only 1 student stating she still preferred the
traditional lecture style of delivering content.

As Gibbs (2010) states, students have different interpretations of what constitutes 'good teaching’. Some are
accustomed to taking responsibility over their own learning and some will expect a teacher to provide all the
content in lectures. Students can interpret good teaching in many ways, for example as increasing their
knowledge, as a teacher clarifying everything or as the teacher facilitating the students' own learning (Van
Rossum, Deijkers and Hamer 1985). Teachers need to take into account the different perceptions students
have regarding teaching it is their responsibility to facilitate the development of students into sophisticated
learners.

Effect on Aspects of Personal Development
In all cases various elements of personal development were also improved. The evaluation results also show
that both in the presentation and feedback sessions and the PBL sessions;

• 90% felt they had increased confidence in presenting their ideas.
• 80% felt they had improved their communication skills.
• 90% Felt more able to tackle unfamiliar problems.

There were no negative evaluations relating to personal development made against either session type with
the remaining students choosing "3-Neither agree nor disagree" to describe their feelings.

Conclusion
From the results it is clear that the benefit to the students in presenting their own investigations to the class
and receiving immediate feedback (supported by video/audio recordings available in their own time) is
significant, advantageous and benefits both their academic and personal development. This combined with a
mixture of traditional delivery methods, class discussions and PBL activities has encouraged them to develop
skills needed to develop a feeling of ownership and responsibility over their own learning (Stefani et al.
2000) and ultimately become will enable them to become 'sophisticated learners' (Gibbs 2010).

The formative feedback study has provided significant and varied information to the tutor about the
students in terms of;

• The student's understanding of their own individual investigations.
• The student's research process.
• The student's level of understanding of other students investigations.
• The student's understanding of the subject matter.
• The variety of students individual learning styles.

The formative feedback study has provided significant and varied information to the tutor about their
teaching in terms of;

• The tutor’s ability to effectively use feedback to improve their teaching practice.
• The tutor’s ability to meet the needs of a diverse range of student learning styles.
• The tutor’s ability to facilitate the student’s development by supporting independent learning.

These findings display the value of conducting this type of analysis and shows how 'the tools used for
evaluation of student learning should ideally be designed to ensure that not only does the teacher gain

insights into student learning but also such that the teacher should obtain useful insights into the
effectiveness of their teaching style or method' (Stefani, Clarke and Littlejohn 2000). It is also important to
remember that using formative feedback to inform teaching is a vital part of reflective practice and needs to
be conducted at regular intervals during module delivery. This benefits the student as it has been shown that
'on degree programmes where the volume of formative assessment is greater, students take a deep
approach to their studies to a greater extent' (Gibbs and Dunbar-Goddet 2007), and it benefits the tutor as
'frequent assessment tasks, especially diagnostic tests, can help teachers generate cumulative inform
about students’ levels of understanding and skill so that they can adapt their teaching accordingly' (Juw
et al. 2004).

Lessons learnt
This study shows that this particular cohort of students preferred to have elements of traditional teaching
i.e. lectures and PBL methods in the same session. This structure better meets the needs of all students as it
caters for diversity in the ability of students and learning styles.

Consideration must be given to inclusivity and accessibility. Design Management 3 is not an on-line module;
so it is important that the majority of learning and the facilitation of student learning is carried out in the
delivered sessions. Other elements that support learning such as additional support materials, audio and
video feedback and other methods must only support and not substitute the learning that takes place in the
delivered sessions.

The tutor is required to facilitate student's development into 'autonomous, independent and self-
motivated learners' (Stefani Clarke, Littlejohn. 2000), and maintain high levels of support that include all
students regardless of ability or specific learning preferences to enable their academic and personal
development.

Considering the evaluation received from this cohort I wouldn't conduct a 100% PBL session for delivery with
this group, but rather conduct a smaller PBL activity with other groups of students to gauge their response
prior to dedicating an entire session to a PBL activity. Consideration must be given to the needs of all
students and I feel this method adversely benefits those students who have engaged in responsibility of their
own learning at the detriment of other students.

In order to better evaluate the success of the changes made to the Design Management 3 module it would
be necessary to compare the results of the student's submitted work against the average of the previous
year’s results. As Gibbs (2010) states 'One of the most telling indicators of the quality of educational
outcomes is the work students submit for assessment, such as their final-year project or dissertation'.
Unfortunately this information is not presently available due to the timing of this case study, but should
certainly be considered at a later date.

A longitudinal study is needed with a greater number of students to test the reliability of the results of this
study. In order to improve the accuracy of the results in establishing the benefit students perceived to get
from the different kinds of formative feedback received throughout this module, I would have also needed
to get student evaluation on the individual tutorial sessions to establish comparison between the
presentation sessions with peer and tutor feedback and the more traditional individual tutorial sessions.

Better methods need to be established in order to get a higher percentage of student feedback and also
more immediate analysis of the data provided. The university has a quiz system that can be used for this
purpose, unfortunately due to the geographical location of the School of Art and Design this may not be a
viable solution if the devices can only be borrowed on a short-term loan. Alternatively there are various on-
line questionnaire sites that could provide this function, in particular ones that allow students to test results,
this could be effective provided students were not liable for the cost of the texts.

Arguably this kind of study can and should be incorporated into the teaching practice of tutors and that this
kind of reflective practice of one's own effectiveness as a facilitator of learning can only benefit students.
When classroom assessment is used to generate (immediate) feedback that both informs students' learning
and informs the teaching practice of teachers it creates a 'feedback loop' that becomes integrated into the
everyday classroom activities, with more usage 'the communications loop connecting faculty and students -

- and teaching and learning -- becomes more efficient and more effective' (Angelo and Cross . 1990).


• Angelo, T. and Cross, P. (1990), Classroom Assessment Techniques. Jossey Bass
• Gibbs, G. (2010), Dimensions of Quality. The Higher Education Academy.
• Gibbs, G. and Dunbar-Goddet, H . (2007), The effects of programme assessment environments on
student learning. Higher Education Academy.
• Juwah, C. Macfarlane, D.D. Matthew, B. Nicol, D. Ross, D. and Smith, B. (2004.), Enhancing student
learning through effective formative feedback. June, Issue: 68. The Higher Education Academy, 1-41.
•Cho, M. and Forde, E. (2001), Designing Teaching and Assessment Methods for Diverse Student
Populations. Journal of Art & Design Education, 20: 86-95.
• Steadman, M. (1998), Using classroom assessment to change both learning and teaching. New Directions
for Teaching and Learning. 75: 23-35.
• Stefani, L.A.J. Clarke, J. Littlejohn, A.H. (2000), Developing a Student- Centred Approach to Reflective
Learning, Innovations in Education & Training International, 37:2, 163-171.
• Van Rossum, E .J., Deijkers, R . and Hamer, R . (1985), Students’ learning conceptions and their
interpretation of significant educational concepts. Higher Education. 14 (6), pp617-641.
• Yorke, M. (2003) Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement
of pedagogic practice. Higher Education 45 (4), 477-501.

Appendix 1:

Student feedback 5 Definitely agree
4 Mostly agree
(adapted from National Student Survey 3 Neither agree nor disagree
2005 Questionnaire) 2 Mostly disagree
N/A Not applicable

The teaching in this lecture 5 4 3 2 1
1. I understand the concepts
explained in this module. … … … … …

2. I understand the
objectives of this session. … … … … …

3. Presenting my ideas
helped me clarify my … … … … …
assignment objectives.

4. Getting feedback from my
peers helps my learning. … … … … …

5. There are enough
additional resources to … … … … …
support my learning.

6. There is enough support
from the lecturer … … … … …

7. The lecturer is enthusiastic
about what they are … … … … …
teaching.

8. The lectures are
… … … … …
intellectually stimulating.

9. The lectures are too
difficult for me to … … … … …
understand


10. The lecture has helped me
to present myself with … … … … …
confidence.

11. My communication skills
have improved. … … … … …

12. As a result of the lecture, I
feel confident in tackling … … … … …
unfamiliar problems.

Other comments

Appendix 2:
Student feedback about PBL session 5 Definitely agree
on Corporate Identity and Corporate Image 4 Mostly agree
(adapted from National Student Survey 2 Mostly disagree
2005 Questionnaire) 1 Definitely disagree
N/A Not applicable

The teaching in this lecture 5 4 3 2 1
1. I understand the concepts
explained in this module. … … … … …

2. I feel this session has
allowed for deeper learning … … … … …
than a traditional lecture.

3. Investigating the learning
objectives in this way has
helped me understand the … … … … …
content better.

4. The PBL session has made
me understand the subject … … … … …
of corporate identity

4. I feel there are areas of
the subject I have not learnt … … … … …
enough about.

6. There was enough
guidance from the lecturer … … … … …

7. The lecturer is enthusiastic
about what they are … … … … …
teaching.

8. This session was
… … … … …
intellectually stimulating.

9. The session makes the
subject difficult for me to … … … …
understand


10. The session has helped me
to present myself with … … … …
confidence.

11. My communication skills
have improved. … … … …

12. As a result of the session, I
feel confident in tackling … … … …
unfamiliar problems.

Other comments

Appendix 3:
Student’s comments on the presentation and feedback session;
"The class presentations are a great way to prepare for the future. Communication is key and group sessions are ideal to improve
ours.
The lectures are always helpful and presented very well and interesting. They are not just talking, there are always visuals on screens
too. I have learnt a great deal in this module and am enjoying the investigation assignment."

"There were some issues and limits we hit which were sound levels. I think a Dictaphone on the table would have had the same
effect but possibly made people feel a bit less intimidated by the camera."

"I feel presenting in front of the class is useful because talking about your investigation helps you clarify what parts you are missing.
Its also really useful to hear fresh ideas from students. After working on the investigation for months, its useful to get someone else's
insight. Especially as sometimes you’ve missed something really obvious. I found it interesting to hear the process that the other
students had undergone. Its useful to hear different ways of tackling an investigation."

Appendix 4:
Student’s comments on the PBL session;
"that session was good. I enjoyed the group work and being able to work on your own and take ownership for your own bit of
knowledge which you have to feed back into the group.
I liked the summary you gave at the end which tied in all the differences, positives and negatives of the way we did it."

"At the start of the lesson when Fiona presented the task, it seemed quite daunting. I felt it was going to be tough task. However as
the session progressed I began to enjoy it more and more. As soon as we started to get involved, it was a lot more interesting than I
had initially predicted. Having to explore the subject matter ourselves made the learning immediate! I felt I understood the topic
because it was in our own terms, rather than a lecture. It also allowed us to put the topic into context which makes the content to
stick a lot better. On the other hand, I feel for students who are not as confident, this style of lecture may be worrying. A few people
in my group voiced at the start they did not like speaking in front of the class. However, taking part in these experiences will only
improve on that skill which will be invaluable for the future. Overall, I feel the session was planned thoroughly and a lot of effort had
been put into it. The timing ran really well, and I felt each section had just the right amount of time. I left the class feeling I had learnt
a lot and had got to know some of the students I hadn't really talked to before. Even though some topics will always suit the ‘lecture
style session’, some sessions can definitely benefit from a set up like the session today."

"This session allowed me to interact better with other students which helped me develop my knowledge through their
understanding of the subject as well as my own.
Allowing me to complete my own research in class helped me to understand the subject in my own way helping me to grasp a
deeper understanding of the subject area. "

Final Conclusion
In order to provide a comparison of the methods used by group the main benefits of each method used and
the limitations of each method are displayed in Table 1.

Group member Formative Benefits of the method Limitations
Feedback (if any)
Method
John Peer-verbal, Giving/receiving in-class peer verbal When first introduced,
Tutor-verbal feedback facilitated coaching and some students took time
technique to effectively engage and
Regular in-class self-assessment feel comfortable with
(reflection) facilitated coaching and giving and receiving peer
technique verbal feedback and
The majority of students think that regularly reflecting
they will continue to give/receive in-
class peer verbal feedback and self-
assess (reflect) for their continuing
professional development
Allows teachers to become
facilitators rather than dictators of
student learning
Provides teachers with a method of
assessing understanding during each
session
Enables a greater amount of content
to be delivered during each session
Provides teachers with opportunities
to create dialogue around the topic
areas

Udayangani Verbal Interactive nature of the subject Technical difficulties when
Improve understanding of the running the system
subject matter Time taken by the
Effective feedback discussions Qwizdom session that can
leading to previous and current be used to teach more
lecture subject content
Effective feedback discussions
leading to overall subject matter
Anonymously of providing answers to
questions
Evaluating students’ position in terms
of the overall class performance
Provide opportunity for the teacher
to create dialogue around the subject
matter
Provide feedback on the student
understanding
Provide feedback on the level of
understanding of different students
(PT and FT)

Fabrizio Oral and Lead to detailed feedback Combining verbal and
Written discussion written feedback takes
Enhance understanding of time
overall subject matter through Students might not be
motivation and self-esteem willing to receive
Improve students’ subsequent feedback twice
interest in learning and
performance
Provide opportunity for the
teacher to exchange views
Provide feedback on student
understanding
Provide feedback on the level of
understanding of individual
students
Fiona Peer-verbal, Provides significant and varied information Only provides information
Tutor-verbal to the tutor about the students in terms of; about a specific group or
Audio The student's understanding of their individual students in
own individual investigations, terms of learning style
research process, level of and level of subject
understanding of other students understanding .
investigations. The students Can be time consuming
understanding of the subject matter when beginning the
and variety of individual learning process of evaluation and
styles. data gathering.
Provides significant and varied information Must be an ongoing
to the tutor about their teaching in terms process to be effective.
of;
The tutor’s ability to effectively use
feedback to improve their teaching
practice, their ability to meet the
needs of a diverse range of student
learning styles and ability to
facilitate the students development
by supporting independent learning.
Table 1. Comparison of the methods used within the group
Table 1. Comparison of the methods used within the group

Below is a brief summary of the main findings from each case study and the observational work conducted
by Caroline, which highlights the benefits of each feedback principle on student learning and identifies issues
related to equality, diversity, inclusivity and accessibility.

1. Facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning
Benefits to student learning:
• Facilitates independent learning
• Enables students to judge their progression towards goals
• Creates an inclusive learning environment

Issues related to equality, diversity, inclusivity and accessibility:
Self-assessment is considered to be an evolution towards a more inclusive democratic learning environment
(Somervell, 1993; Dearing, 1997) as it promotes greater equality of power between teachers and students
(Taras, 2008), which has been shown to enhance student learning (Black and William, 1998; Nicol and

Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). It is also postulated that self-assessment provides inclusivity among students from
any level and/or stage of the assessment process (Taras, 2008).

2. Encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning:
• Creates effective dialogue between learners and teachers regarding the subject matter
• Increases student engagement during the class
• Allows the incorporation of technologies for teaching

There are learners with different requirements such as difficulty of hearing, understanding, concentrating,
communicating with others, accessing text, and learners with dyslexia. Feedback provided during the
Qwizdom session was accessible to all due to the visibility of the illustrated answers in the power-point
slides and engagement with the dialogue created around the questions. Unlike written feedback that might
not favourable to dyslexic students, the discussions created around the Qwizdom questions and answers are
helpful to all students. Apart from the formative feedback sessions using Qwizdom, the module is also
supplemented with an online test to provide feedback for students. These diverse methods of formative
feedback methods improve equality and diversity of learning for students.

3. Helps clarify what is (goals, criteria, expected standards)
• It is vital that the students understand what is expected of them


6. Encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem:
• Leads to detailed feedback discussions
• Enhances student understanding
• Improves students’ interest in learning

Combining oral and written feedback means that students who have a tendency to compare themselves
against others - rather than to focus on the difficulties in the task - will have less chance to do so. Further
students’ feedback becomes more inclusive and accessible as two different means are used.

7. Provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching:
• Provides individual information about the specific needs of a particular group of students rather
than generic information that can be applied to any other group of students
• Is a vital part of reflective practice and using formative feedback to enhance student learning that
needs to be conducted at regular intervals during module delivery
• Needs to be done so that information gathering and data analysis can be done quickly and
effectively

The variety of assessment techniques and feedback methods described in the case study, such as students
presentations and group discussions, peer feedback, video and audio feedback provide ever-more diverse
student populations support to their learning. It allows teachers to adapt their teaching in a way that can
optimise student learning and academic achievement (Cho and Forde 2001). Providing feedback in a variety
of formats addresses issues relating to inclusivity and accessibility as these methods don’t exclude students
with learning difficulties, problems with reading and understanding information and those that simply want
the ability to refer back to feedback and discussion about their work.

Future directions
Future work should be conducted in order to investigate the benefits of the two principles of good feedback
practice which were not investigated within the current case studies. These were that good feedback
practice should: “provide opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance” and
“deliver high quality information to students about their learning”.

Assessment and feedback study group project

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Assessment and feedback study group project

Similar to Assessment and feedback study group project (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Assessment and feedback study group project