ALTC 2013 Writing Buddies

Parallel Session B2: Beverley Lawe, Jamie Tinney

Aim

• To share experience of the ‘writing buddy’ system trialled within Design & Technology Secondary Initial Teacher Training (ITT)

• To evaluate the benefits of pre-assignment activity which engages with assessment using Learning Outcomes with students

• To appraise the value of peer to peer review before submitting work for assessment

21 April 2023 2

The context

• Prior to 2013 the PGCE in secondary education was a Level 3 default course with the option of 60 credits at Masters Level with qualified teacher status (QTS).

• For September 2013 the course was revalidated and is now a PGDE with a default route of 120 Masters level credits and QTS.

• The intake in terms of degree awarded has not changed significantly 35% of the intake had a 2.2 degree this year compared to 45% in 2011/12.

21 April 2023 3

Attainment in recent years:

21 April 2023 4

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14Success rate on 1st assignment

Level 316

Mlevel17

Level 316

Mlevel18

Level 313

Mlevel14

Level 33

Mlevel11

49% 51% 47% 53% 48% 52% 22% 78%

On the second assignment 66% passed at M level

So what did we do?

• Research suggests that when students are engaged in the assessment process they achieve better grades. PRICE, M. & O’DONOVAN, B (2006)

• We carried out an exercise in class where the students marked/assessed anonymous work submitted at M level from a previous cohort, using a GBA assessment grid created for that assignment.

• They did this with a partner so that they could discuss the work and engage with the criteria/LO’s use for assessment.

• We took feedback and further discussions ensued.

• Students then had an insight as to how we look for evidence against the LO’s

21 April 2023 5

Taking self-assessment further

• Each trainee was given a buddy

• The instructions were to use their buddy as an assessor prior to the assessment deadline and provide feedback to each other – this added another tier to the existing assessment & feedback plan.

• Further work was carried out in sessions where students were paired with their buddy (where possible) to encourage collaborative work.

21 April 2023 6

The first assignment

• Students worked on their first assignment before and whilst on school placement

• A reminder e-mail was sent to encourage them to use their buddy before the hand-in deadline.

• After the assignment had been submitted but before the next assignment was due in a ‘Survey Monkey’ was sent out to all the trainees in the cohort – several ‘chaser’ e-mails were sent to obtain a 75% response rate.

21 April 2023 7

Responses to survey questions

Why would you not use your buddy for the next assignment?

Conclusions:

• Uptake for the use of an assigned ‘buddy’ was low.

• As teachers of the future we would expect peer assessment to be part of their classroom practice –yet many are reluctant to be part of it themselves

• Those who did use their ‘Buddy’ found it beneficial

• The majority probably missed out on a useful experience

• Students probably need to choose their own ‘buddy’

• Work in class needs to reinforce the value of using a ‘buddy’ by modelling/encouraging good practice

21 April 2023 14

21 April 2023 15

References:

• O’DONOVAN, B, PRICE, M & RUST, C 2004) Know what I mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment standards and criteria, Teaching in Higher Education, 9(3) pp. 325-335

• PRICE, M. & O’DONOVAN, B 2006 Improving Performance through enhancing student understanding of criteria and feedback. In BRYAN C. & CLEGG K. Eds. Innovative Assessment in Higher Education. Routledge. London.2006 pp.100-109

• http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/article/assessment_standards_a_manifesto_for_change/