CONTENTS

Contents .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 0

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Key Findings..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

The Questions... ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Background ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2

The questions .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 4

How feedback currently contributes to learning ................................................................................................................................................... 4

Preferred methods of feedback ............................................................................................................................................................................... 4

three week turnaround policy .................................................................................................................................................................................. 5

Should students receive exam feedback? ............................................................................................................................................................ 6

Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7

For the university of kent: ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 7

For Kent Union: ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7

Useful contacts ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly 2010-11

1 | P a g e

INTRODUCTION

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly campaign consisted of a consultation conducted by Kent Union and focused on feedback on

assessment. As well as being a manifesto commitment of Lauren Crowley, Vice-President (Education) 2010-2012, it stemmed from

popular opinion expressing dissatisfaction amongst the student body at the University of Kent and nationally that feedback on

assessment is not of a satisfactory quality. The results of every National Student Survey since its commencement support the premise

that this is a top concern for students. It is highly recommended that the National Student Survey results are considered in

conjunction with this report.

The survey was sent via email to 15,996 students at the launch in February, it was publicised to students via Facebook, Twitter, posters

across campus, at the Kent Union Refreshers’ Fayre, and many course representatives at the University of Kent used different

methods to secure submissions. The following video was created to screen across campus: http://bit.ly/gZNLY9. We received 350

responses to the survey.

The survey was developed in consultation with Kent Union’s marketing and democracy departments, the National Union of Students,

current students, full and part-time Kent Union officers and course representatives.

In the beginning of the academic year 2010/11, the School rep for Biosciences, Ryan Johnson, started work on feedback on

assessment standards, recognising there was a need for improvement. Because of this Bioscience students did not complete the

Good, the Bad & the Ugly survey, but Ryan’s work is in the appendices (A) of this report.

KEY FINDINGS

93% of students either strongly agree or agree with the statement ‘students should receive exam feedback’.

92% said they would like to receive formative feedback as well as summative on their assessment.

Only 61% of students said they received their assessments back within three weeks.

90% of students either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement ‘students should have access to face-to-face feedback

for the first assessment each academic year.

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly 2010-11

2 | P a g e

THE QUESTIONS...

BACKGROUND

The National Union of Students highlighted feedback on assessment as a concern for students through their own surveying of

students across different institutions. Some key facts taken from the 2008 NUS/HSBC Student Experience Report1:

Written marks and grades are received by 90% of students, and written comments received by 85%. Individual verbal

feedback is received by 25%, while group verbal feedback is received by 22%.

Only 1% of students say that they receive feedback through the internet, either online or by email.

Students who attend a post-1992 institution are most likely to receive verbal feedback, with those attending Russell Group

institutions least likely to receive verbal feedback.

71% of students said they would like to receive feedback through an individual meeting with their tutor/lecturer; however, only

25% of those surveyed currently receive feedback in this way. Only 18% of science students state they receive verbal

feedback.

90% of students said they would like to receive feedback on their exams.

From this research, NUS went on to create the ‘Charter on Feedback and Assessment2’which has helped create the survey we have

used at Kent and advocate many principles that University of Kent students are in favour of.

The results of the 2010 National Student Survey results highlighted that regardless of course or background at the University of Kent,

students were significantly less satisfied about the feedback that they received than their overall learning experience. The University

of Kent ranked 3.7 for feedback and assessment, its lowest score out of all the questions. Student satisfaction regarding this issue has

dropped 1% since 2008, and slipped out of the upper quartile in this theme. This followed levels of discontentment that had arisen in

the survey since it started in 2005, indicating that the issue is both pervasive and continuous.

1 http://bit.ly/fl2WdH 2 http://www.nusconnect.org.uk/asset/news/6010/FeedbackCharter-toview.pdf

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly 2010-11

3 | P a g e

In September, Kent Union carried out a focus group of students from the faculty of Humanities to gauge opinion on the recently

piloted coversheet and one to one feedback sessions carried out by tutors. The following are some of the recommendations:

Lecturers keeping to the three week turnaround policy.

Being able to choose the format for feedback which suits them, either via email, or verbal one to one, choosing an individual

time with a tutor or more general feedback to the class which allows them to improve in future assignments.

‘The better the essay, the smaller the amount of feedback’ – lecturers guiding even those who may be doing well, to continue

or improve further.

Further guidance on how to apply feedback.

Formative feedback throughout the term.

The following campaign objectives were therefore set for ‘The Good, the Bad & the Ugly’ feedback campaign:

Improve NSS scores by 1% for each year the campaign is run.

All university schools to provide feedback on every assessment via the recommended coversheet.

To adapt the ten principles from the NUS charter on feedback and assessment.

To establish at what percentage academics currently stick to the 3 week turnaround policy and then improve this to 90%.

To look into the following suggested feedback mechanisms with the university:

1) The provision of model answers (help grow understanding of marking criteria)

2) Generic feedback to all students (common mistakes made in exams etc)

3) Optional seminars to discuss recent assessments/exams

4) Individual one to one feedback on request

5) The provision of exam scripts with comment sheets.

However, as the research had not yet been finalised, the campaign objectives are subject to change upon the data within this

report.

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly 2010-11

4 | P a g e

65.6% Strongly Agree

24.8% Agree

5.4% Neutral

3.1% Disagree

0.6% Strongly Disagree

0.6% N/A

THE QUESTIONS

HOW FEEDBACK CURRENTLY CONTRIBUTES TO LEARNING

On the two statements, ‘Feedback on my work has helped me clarify

things I did not understand’ (69.43% strongly agree or agree) and ‘I

have received detailed comments on my work’ (69.14% strongly agree

or agree); it is evident that where students are receiving feedback it is

satisfactory – although it could be argued that this percentage could

and should be higher. The faculty of Humanities have been trialling

one face-to-face feedback session per module this academic year.

With extremely positive feedback from students and the statistic shown

here, it is recommended that the other faculties consider rolling this

out.

PREFERRED METHODS OF FEEDBACK

92.29% of survey respondents said they would like to receive formative

feedback as well as summative on their assessment. Many students

have voiced that they think feedback on formative assessment could

help them improve their quality of work. Formative assessment and

feedback is critical to the development of learning and should be

integrated into the curriculum in a strategic way.

50.86% said there should be anonymous marking for all summative

assessment, 27.43% were neutral and 20% disagreed or strongly

disagreed. NUS research shows that where anonymous marking has

been introduced there has been an improvement in the marks of

women, black and Asian students and among some other students groups. Anonymous marking provides reassurance for

“Feedback on coursework sometimes takes a very

long time, for example essay feedback would be

more useful if returned before the submission

deadline of the following essay assessment, allowing

previous feedback to be used to improve on weak

points in work. And sometimes feedback is very

vague, ticks and crosses with often no explanation of

why work is incorrect.”

Student from the School of Maths, NSS 2010

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly 2010-11

5 | P a g e

students and staff against the perception of discrimination. Where anonymous marking is not possible, especially in the arts,

there should be stringent measures to blind double mark, or use external examiners.

82.28% of students thought they should be able to submit assessment electronically; with only 4.57% disagreeing or strongly

disagreeing. University policy is that use of Turnitin should be compulsory – however some schools are not currently operating it.

This increased flexibility will support part-time and distance learners as well as other non-traditional students, such as those with

caring responsibilities or those who commute to university.

72.86% of students thought they should be supported to critique their own work with 8.85% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing.

68.57% of students believed they should be given a choice of formats for feedback. Students want feedback in a variety of

formats, including verbal, written and electronic. At the start of the year students should also be able to state their preferred

form of summative feedback. This provides a useful focus for a meeting with a personal tutor, while giving students a choice in

the form of feedback; and making the feedback more physically accessible to them. This approach should ensure that all

students, no matter whether they are full-time, part-time, or distance learners, will have easy access to their feedback.

THREE WEEK TURNAROUND POLICY

The student charter3 states, ‘Work will normally be returned within three term-

time weeks of the published deadline’. In Kent Union’s Education Forum in

2011, course reps were asked if they were aware of the policy and the result

3 http://www.kent.ac.uk/regulations/Regulations%20Booklet/Student-Charter-2008.pdf

“Our marks never come back to us within the 3 week

deadline, and haven't really done so since my first

year. It would seem some tutors don't understand

how important it is to learn from our feedback.”

Student from the School of Arts, NSS 2010

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly 2010-11

6 | P a g e

was unanimously in favour. They were then asked if they knew that the 3 weeks was specific to term time. A significantly lower

amount of reps raised their hand. Work could be done to ensure that students understand this. From this survey we can see only 60%

of students say they receive their assessments within three weeks of submission and is again reiterated by comments made by

students in the National Student Survey 2010 (Appendix B).

SHOULD STUDENTS RECEIVE EXAM FEEDBACK? 71% Strongly Agree

22% Agree

3.7% Neutral

1.4% Disagree

2% N/A

0% Strongly Disagree

Providing exam feedback is not widespread across the sector. Kent Union firmly believes

that the role of feedback as something that is not simply a measure of performance, but

also a tool to aid future learning, is equally applicable to exam assessments as to any

other type of assessment. This is a missed opportunity to aid the learning of students and

improve future work. As such, an institution’s failure to provide this to students is

unacceptable.

Some institutions that currently provide exam feedback: University of Bath, Heriot- Watt

University and Canterbury Christ Church University.

“Easily my biggest frustration with respect to this

experience is the complete lack of feedback on exams. It

seems off that exams would be the one aspect of the

learning process without feedback.”

Student from Kent Law School, NSS 2010

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly 2010-11

7 | P a g e

RECOMMENDATIONS

FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF KENT:

All academic schools to provide feedback on every assessment via the recommended cover sheet.

Students should have access to face-to-face feedback for a least the first piece of assessment each academic year.

Work should be done to ensure that feedback is timely and within the three week policy.

Students should be given the choice of format for feedback.

Students should be able to submit assessment electronically.

Anonymous marking should be considered for all summative assessment.

The provision of model answers should be considered to help grow understanding of marking criteria.

The provision of exam scripts with comment sheets should be implemented.

Generic feedback to groups should be considered and also optional seminars to discuss feedback.

FOR KENT UNION:

Run ‘The Good, the Bad & the Ugly’ again in 2011/12.

Work with the university to see a rise in satisfaction rates in the National Student Survey.

Work with the university and academic schools to specifically improve the turnaround time of feedback.

Continue to campaign for exam feedback.

Work with the university and academic schools to monitor the implementation of all above targets.

USEFUL CONTACTS

For more information about...

...’The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’ campaign please contact Kent Union’s Vice-President (Education) on union-

education@kent.ac.uk or Kent Union on www.kentunion.co.uk

...the University of Kent please visit www.kent.ac.uk