Transcript Document

Workshop for New Lecturers:
Statement Bank/‘Boiler Plating’
Feedback Approaches
Date: 30-31 January, 2007
Dr Alan Webb
Subject Centre Associate based at
The University of Ulster, Jordanstown
Campus
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 BoilerPlating 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; dynamic
option
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!)
• 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.
Evaluation
Questions/discussion
[email protected]
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 learnercentered 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