Transcript Galway

STUDENT FEEDING TIME?
EXPLORING THE ROLE OF FEEDBACK
IN UNDERGRADUATE TEACHING
AND LEARNING
Dr Joan Lalor (School of Midwifery & Nursing, TCD)
Dr Aidan Seery (School of Education,TCD)
Dr Andrew Loxley (School of Education, TCD)
ORIGINS OF THE STUDY
 The pilot is part of a larger three institution project proposal (TCD,
Loughborough, Exeter) for an ERC grant (€1.59 million)
 As part of the planning of the proposal we engaged in some
pilot/reconnaissance work
 We conducted interviews with academic staff (4) and students: history (25),
dental science (20) and midwifery (14)
 Selection of students and staff based on disciplinary domain and stage of
degree
THE PILOT SAMPLE
 History – 1st year
 Dental science – 4th year [6th year programme]
 Midwifery – 4th year
 Lecturers – all full-time experienced academics (3 hold teaching
qualifications)
 For the pilot we were interested in exploring student experience of
feedback in undergraduate education
 Aim: Intention was to see if the 12 principles of feedback were apparent
in the students experiences
WHO ARE WE?
Joan Lalor – 12 years in HE UG & PG [Midwifery]
Aidan Seery – 13 years in HE UG & PG [Education]
Andrew Loxley – 20 years HE UG & PG [Education]
(All three of us are qualified teachers and have had
professional lives outside of HE)
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Effective feedback- following an analysis of 460 articles:
‘no general agreement regarding what type of feedback is most helpful and why it is
helpful’
General principles include –
 Ongoing, integral part of assessment, has an AFFECTIVE dimension and impacts
on performance
 Assessment guidance is explicit
 Emphasis placed on feed forward rather than feedback
 Peer assessment and marking
 Student engagement with the process (ability to benefit?)
 Feedback is appropriate to student level and is specific
 Focuses on performance and improvement
 Feedback involves training
And from the
literature we get
QUALITY & QUANTITY
 Some people are very good with feedback. They’re very
clear and they give you good direction. And then others
can be very vague about it. (MW)
 And sometimes like they don’t break down the positives
along with the negatives. So like you mightn’t necessarily
know what you did really really well on in the assignment
and then what took you down (in) the marks. It’s usually
always put in the negative or what you forgot. (MW)
QUALITY AND QUANTITY
 It’s most valuable if its honest.. It needs to be more specific-
with comments beside the grade even when it is good...
There are times I got a good (mark)... but the feedback
wasn’t really reflective of how I was getting on.. It should
have been lower.. It’s a safe bet (for the assessor) .. It’s good
as I’m getting through the module but the main part of
feedback is to draw attention to weaknesses- but in terms
of practical progression it doesn’t impact on my practical
progress in terms of skills (DS4)
QUALITY AND QUANTITY
 .. the format of the tutorials, at least as I’ve
experienced them is that we discuss whatever the
topic is of the day and then we’re told ... we are
supposed to hand up a written piece that we’re already
prepared (in) reference to that, which we may or may
not get back, depending upon the individual (H1)
 We usually get it back but eh it may or may not have
any particular comments on it (H3)
QUALITY AND QUANTITY
The feedback is very variable... Something like ‘good
but put more stuff from the primary source stuff’ it
was... was all that I got
Again, there again, they... it just appears to be quite
em, maybe not arbitrary, but there appears to be a
degree of latitude eh from one em from one
person who’s actually taking the tutorials to
another (H7).
MATCHING ASSESSMENT & CONTENT
You have to delve a lot deeper though for ... well
with some lecturers you can just get like the bare
minimum – It varies like ‘here’s your question’.
Whereas others would really talk you through every
aspect of it, like ‘this is what I want in your
introduction’ ‘this is what I want in your assignment’
type of thing, whereas other lectures just ‘off you go’
and ‘here you are, do that’. (MW)
MATCHING ASSESSMENT & CONTENT
 Yeah yeah and again there are different ways, different
expectations in terms of how you should present something
and how you should write as well there. So it’s really the
talks I hear about the more sort of standard essay format
we did for sociology there and again they just go off and do
it without much, too much guidance about how to actually
put it together as a piece of writing and again I suppose
that’s the difference between them telling you how to put it
together and as a piece of writing and telling you the
answer which is the – you know what it should be about.
Any comments over here, did you pick up anything ? (MW)
MATCHING ASSESSMENT & CONTENT
It does vary from what they’re looking for. The
person who’s looking at it again, it depends on
what they’re looking for . . like one lecturer might
say when you’ve done an exam, ‘well I was looking
for you to mention this’, whereas another one
would say ‘oh no, I don’t need you to mention that,
I just need you to mention the other thing’. (MW)
MATCHING ASSESSMENT & CONTENT
 I remember we came out of our Christmas exams and the
following day we heard Dr X wasn’t marking the question
it’s one of the other guys...You kind of have in your head
who is marking it and you go with what they have been
saying all along.. .
 There was one example where one of the girls in the class
took a photo of the marking scheme from the board and
she was going to give it to the year behind and the DTL
heard about it and she had to delete the photo... Its like
they don’t want the criteria to get out (DS8)
EXPECTATIONS OF ASSESSMENTS
 The lecturers might give learning outcomes at the start of the
lecture… I go by those as they don’t make the assessment criteria
explicit.. The ones in the handbook are quite bland (DS)
 We need more time to revise (DS 2)
 For some assessments you are given the basic marking structure and
that’s fine but for other questions they are not well structured... You
write your answer to please the supervisor and different people want
different things... Sometimes you have to look up past papers to get an
idea of what might come up on the exam (DS3)
EXPECTATIONS OF ASSESSMENT
Some people say... whenever I ask you a question I want
you to define the central terms... That’s good as they
(the examiners) are all different but the exams are set
by different people, some I have never met before or
have very little contact with...unless you have contact
with the examiner you can’t figure out what the
expectations are... The only way I know I am meeting
the criteria is the fact I am passing (DS4)
EXPECTATIONS
 On the last day before Christmas I found the feedback I got quite helpful but
as a 1st year I found it almost redundant that I got quite detailed feedback
afterwards rather than any guidance whatsoever beforehand. Do you know
what I mean? (H8)
 I mean they’re saying if you want some help with your essay there’s a very
sort of loose and freeform em ... ‘we’re open to giving you some feedback, if
you give us some stuff’. But there’s no formal process, nothing like what
you’ve described there [a draft with comments] (H4)
 there’s very little way of kind of gauging what was expected, you know. And
also it differs across – the different tutorial as well... So you’re sort of
working in an ‘unknown-ness’ (H9)
TIMELINESS
we have a presentation at the end of the week.
Now albeit it’s a mock presentation but it is part of
our mark and we have to pass it, to be able to
progress to the next stage and we only got the
subject of that last week. We were told that it was
coming up last September but we only got the
subject for it last week. I mean we’ve one week to
prepare! And they will expect us to have a good
presentation there (MW)
TIMELINESS
 I’m happy enough with the timing of feedback… once its on a continuous
basis! (DS)
 I prefer face to face feedback, it can be followed up with a written sheet, but it
needs to be continuous to give you a chance to respond... Definitely not good
enough to just have it at the end of the module.. More objective criteria would
be good as its a bit subjective they just give g g g g g (Good) but don’t say why
(DS3)
 Immediate oral feedback is best certainly in clinics.. It has to be immediate I
had one incident where I couldn’t understand what was being said and you
need clarification as if it’s not integrated it might affect progress and if its too
late you are trying to remember what it referred to (DS4)
STUDENT-LECTURER RELATIONSHIP
 It’s actually alright some of the feedback. It’s just really you know,
just if you can get someone approachable you know. Or you go on
a mark and you really want to get a higher one and they go ‘like you
passed’ and then you’re going ‘well like okay fine I’m happy, I’m here
to pass. But I’d like to do a little bit better and ‘. And then they’ll say
‘look it, don’t worry, Sure I just barely passed all through my
college. So it doesn’t really matter’. And you’re going ‘well you
know, you’re pushing yourself and you’re trying to learn and you’re
trying to. . .get a degree to benefit you know and this is why you’re
here and they go ‘sure, you’ll be happy with that’. You know so
sometimes they can be a bit dismissive of you, looking to try and do
a bit better, you know.
STUDENT-LECTURER RELATIONSHIP
 I think the course seems a bit disorganised because of
miscommunication that goes on within the school between
lecturers and the office and us (MW)
 It’s a two-way thing- you need to be able to discuss it… (DS)
 .. I didn’t like his approach- basically he said if you see me (in the
clinical assessment) you’re in trouble…we were all called in for
feedback after the exam but the door was left open, I didn’t like it
(DS)
STUDENT-LECTURER RELATIONSHIP
 Regular meetings with the supervisor means they are more
approachable and you are more likely to seek feedback (DS3)
 A bit of training on the difference between straight out criticism and
feedback would be good (DS3)
 Can you give me any specific advice on how to get better (I wont
take offence) (DS4)
 I feel the environment is friendly and I could ask for feedback (DS4)
MEDIATION OF PRIOR LEARNING
 We have PBL in our course and I find different things are
discussed in different tutorial groups so I have been to an exam
where the topic wasn’t covered in my group and I got a lower
mark.. It’s frustrating (DS)
 I wouldn’t really challenge the feedback I’ve been given…we have
exam review sessions but its just to tick a box, its all one way… I
was annoyed with a few exam questions but I didn’t challenge it
as you don’t want to draw attention to yourself (DS)
MEDIATION OF PRIOR LEARNING
 There is a system in the school where students are asked
for feedback on exams but they are afraid to criticise ...
 ‘There were flaws in some questions but... If you want this
process to be worth it then you need to take account of
student feedback... Its a bit like “thanks for your point..
NEXT”.. changing one word would change your approach
to a question and excellent students can give good advice
on the questions (DS4)
UTILITY OF FEEDBACK FOR DEVELOPMENT
 I find feedback really good when I have something to work on (DS)
 It’s very good clinically as it helps you to progress, develop your skills and
treat patients (DS2)
 The supervisors that you have a better relationship with you listen to most-
some are too soft and some are too harsh, the balanced ones that explain
their comments are best … you will take on board what they say (DS4)
 The people you see most frequently matter most as they can see your
progression… It gives credibility to the feedback (DS8)
 I think they [teaching assistants] are afraid to be specific and also I think it
was a subject that he didn’t actually know very much about – so I didn’t
really rate his feedback (H4)
UTILITY OF FEEDBACK FOR DEVELOPMENT
 The feedback [around exams] could be improved... It’s more
useful when you don’t ask for it.. If there is any barrier to getting
it then you probably bother...it needs to be easy to access it...
The feedback is quite bad after exams... Unless you fail an exam
there’s really none... There is a lot of people who want more that
the pass and should be given the opportunity to improve... I
respond more to criticism...(DS7)
CONCLUSIONS FROM THE PILOT?
 Variability of experience generally (re different lecturers,
course expectations not always explicit )
 Programme structure is key mediating factor
 Kind of programme did not appear to make a difference in
experience
 Stage of degree did not seem to make a difference re:
same issues
 Lecturers – agree on principles but are mediated (but not
determined) by programme context and module content
SOME FURTHER QUESTIONS TO
FEEDBACK INTO THE MAIN STUDY
 How can (or should?) principles capture the tacit knowledge of lecturers
practice & experience?
 Can programmes & module descriptors adequately allow for harmonization
of principles but variability in teaching & learning techniques & practice?
 How can feedback practices (written, oral) capture the multiplicity of
learning experiences (including different lecturers) we wish students to
have?
 What is our responsibility in communicating to students the role of
feedback in their own and our learning?
 What can we learn about our practice from the students response to our
feedback practice?