Upload
jazmyn-seeman
View
215
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Maximising feedback opportunities
Lyndsey Welch – Lecturer and ILT Coordinator in Sport, Exercise and Fitness
Maximising the use of Mahara and TURNITIN to encourage innovative and
high quality online feedback.
Session overview
• To introduce the potential of technologies namely TURNITIN and Mahara to maximise both formative and summative feedback quality and opportunities
• Case studies: - To share ideas on how Loughborough College have used these technologies
• To discuss current and potential uses of such tools in different sectors
• To summarise potential institutional and pedagogical affordances
• To offer insight into the other things to consider
Aim
Good feedback
The seven principles of good feedback (Nicol and MacFarlane-Dick 2006)
helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, expected standards)
facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning
delivers high quality information to students about their learning
encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning
encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem
provides opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance
provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
What is TURNITIN?
www.submit.ac.uk
• Online submission, plagiarism checker and grading tool
• Excellent assignment management tool
• Integration options; Blackboard, Blackboard CE/Vista, Moodle, ANGEL, and Desire2Learn.
• TURNITIN UK
• All HE assignments
• For all suitable file types
• Full process
How it has been used?TURNITIN
Feedback on TURNITIN
Strengths of feedback capability
Things to be aware of
• Ability to have pre-set quick marks and comments
• Consistency across markers
• Directive feedback possible
• Plagiarism checker
• Better grading/expectations through custom rubrics
• All features sit within the same upload system – submission, plagiarism, grading, feedback for students
• Depends on the version • Limited formatting• Cannot attach a file present• No formal IV process/log in• Doesn’t check spg
Weaknesses of feedback capability
• Basic plug in available for Moodle 2.0.
• Different benefits of new/old version
• Old version likely to stay until Sept 2012
1234567
Peermark on TURNITIN
• Opportunity for both formative summative feedback
• Many ways to assign papers • Peer support• Saves tutor time • Can be anonymous • Offers same platform as tutor
marking• Can extend to other type of
resources e.g. reviewing a Journal paper
Strengths
• Students reluctant to share work
• Slightly confusing to set up• Student still expect tutor
review
Weaknesses
Things to be aware of
Nb: Currently no available plug in for Moodle 2.0 that incorporates PeerMark. It is however in development
1234567
Mahara
What is Mahara?
Student centred e-portfolio system
Learners and staff can use Mahara to demonstrate their learning, skills and development and record their achievements over time to a selected audience.
Mahara – case study 1
Reflective blogs
• Period of extensive staff development as part of LSIS bid
• Reflective process over 6-7 weeks
• Technology ‘expert’ supported process by commenting on reflection offering ways to move forward.
Other examples
Further work
Employability skills – blog of skill development
Professional development for students
• Building criteria into the assessment grading grid to promote reflection
• Ways to build two way dialogue
Example
1234567
Mahara – case study 2
Supporting student work
• Used to support 1st time pass rates on Higher National Diploma.
• Final outcome – students to submit 4 views on different topics.
• Student share view with tutors
• Tutors give intermediate feedback on at least one occasion
• Students submit final assignment
• Extending this provision across other HND units
• Encouraging more formative feedback in other modules
Example
Future work 1234567
Supporting feedback
Other uses of Mahara for feedback
• Wiki type activities - getting small groups to work on developing a webpage on a certain topic.
• Then students can peer review each others work and post feedback.
Group work/Peer reviews
Things to be aware of
Feedback is private by default, but can be made public. The owner of the content can then make it private – but this can’t be changed back once done.
Once left, feedback can’t be deleted/edited by the owner of the view/blog or by the leaver of the feedback – it can only be made private.
1234567
Discussion – enhancing feedback practices
Small groups
How could these be used to improve your current feedback practices? If you are already using it how does it improve your practice?
How do they compare to other tools you use? Share other good practice
Feedback
• One example of either from each group
- More timely and accessible feedback – enhance reflection
- More private feedback
- Access to potentially more feedback from a range of sources
- Online feedback improves common issues such as illegibility of writing and gives options for student to increase size of font etc…
- Directive feedback
- More opportunity to reflect
Possible pedagogical benefits
Possible institutional benefits
Efficiency
• The potential of peer feedback reduces the pressures on staff time.
• Reduces the need for admin support collating assignments/returning assignments to students
• More flexible access to assignments for marking
Consistency
• Quickmarks in TURNITIN – can be pre loaded• Rubrics for grading grids • Open access to view other tutors marking – also means more
effective monitoring and allowing interventions• Template views can be set up in Mahara
Final thoughts – practical application
Other tools – Quia/Hot Potatoes/VLE software
Institutional and pedagogical aims
Platform differences
Automated vs. manual options
Version differences
Cohort sizes/type: cost-benefit analysis
Polices/procedures
Questions and contact details
Questions
Contact details
Lyndsey Welch
Loughborough College
Radmoor Road
Le11 3bt
Email: [email protected]
References/useful paper
References
Other interesting papers on this topic
Nicol, D. 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): pp. 199-218.
Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J. and O'Donovan, B. (2010). Feedback: all that effort but what is the effect? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 35(3): pp. 277-289.
Rolfe, V. (2010). Can Turnitin be used to provide instant formative feedback? British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01091.
Shortis, M. and Burrows, S. (2009). A review of the status of online, semi-automated marking and feedback systems. Proceedings of: ATN Assessment Conference 2009: Assessment in Different Dimensions. Melbourne, Australia, pp. 302-312.
Yorke, J., Gibson, W. and Wilkinson, H. (2010). Towards sustainable marking practises and improved quality of feedback in short-answer assessments. ATN Assessment Conference. Sydney, Australia.