Upload
blackboard-inc
View
2.409
Download
7
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Patris van BoxelUBVU
Blackboard Teaching and Learning Conference24 April 2012
Gaining Efficiency through Digital Marking and Feedback
Patris van Boxel ([email protected])Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Content Institutional context Impact of feedback on learning Organisation of feedback Digital marking and feedback in Bb
Turnitin Building Block Peer feedback / Teacher feedback
Future work / Conclusions
Institutional Context VU Strategic Plan (2011-2015) Bachelor education key priorities
Increase quality Increase study success Reduce % drop-out rates Increase cost efficiency (‘operational
excellence’)
Increased focus on feedback Guideline Bachelor Education (1/9/2012)
Assessment take place frequently and timely. Halfway through a course (at the latest) an interim assessment will evaluate student progress and provide feedback. Each course will be completed with a final assessment. For each course, the weight of the various assessments will be predetermined. This will provide the basis for the final assessment.
Most powerful impact on ‘student achievement’(Hattie & Timperley, 2007)
Characteristics Timely, personalised, information-rich ‘Feedforward’: bridging the gap between
current and desired (end) result
Organisation of feedback Teachers
Written feedback time consuming Large student groups Inefficient process (storage,
distribution,..) Repetitive aspects of feedback
Students Accessibility of feedback Comprehension and use of feedback
Turnitin software suite
• On-screen marking (teacher)
Grade Mark
• Peer feedback (student)
Peer Mark
• Scan for plagiarism
‘Originality’ Report
Turnitin integration with Bb
Since 2003 to facilitate peer review (turnitin.com)
Since 2011 integrated with Bb Reasons for integration
Immediate access for Bb users to functionality
Less support / system admin overhead Shared marking between instructors in same
Bb course
Why teachers use PeerMark Activating learning method
Deeper processing of learning content Development of feedback skills
Review criteria give insight in required quality of own work
Can handle large quantities of feedback with quick turn-around
How teachers use PeerMark Choice of peer review design context-
dependent Typical formative peer feedback cycle:
Teacher provides assessment criteria Students submit paper in Bb Peer Mark distributes papers random accross
(x) reviewers Students complete review(x) Students receive review(x) Student processes feedback (demonstrable)
and submits final paper version
PeerMark in Blackboard
Peer feedback success factors Clear, concrete assessment criteria Clear task description, procedure and
deadlines Allow for practice and show good / bad
examples of peer feedback Feedback from peers should be
demonstrably read/used to improve course work
Feedback process is between students, but lecturer should play an active role as expert
Why teachers use GradeMark Steady increase in users since BB
integration (50 >250 active GM users)
Saves time (up to 40%) Less logistical overhead More efficient essay management Less repetitive feedback work
Saves paper (a lot!) Speeds up introduction of new teachers
to faculty procedures on assessment
How teachers use GradeMark Students submit paper via
Blackboard All papers accessible in one place Automatic scan for plagiarism (%) Docent provides feedback via:
Annotations ‘QuickMarks’ (reusable feedback) ‘Rubrics’ (scoring forms)
demo
GradeMark in Blackboard
‘QuickMarks’ in GradeMark
Rubrics in GradeMark
Rubrics in GradeMark
GradeMark potential Stimulates wider approach to
assessing and (development of) feedback criteria
Potential to increase transparancy / uniformity of assessment procedures
Potential to increase quality of feedback
Exploring the potential through SCALA ‘SCaffolding Assessment for Learning’ (2012-
2014) National funding (SURF) to develop ways to
efficiently provide formative feedback Project aims:
Development of high quality, reusable feedback criteria (quickmarks and rubrics)
Balancing & combining teacher and peer feedback Mapping of efficient digital feedback-workflows
Cognitive load during on-screen marking Substantiate claims on time saving and re-use of
feedback
Conclusions Turnitin enriches Bb through its
dedicated feedback tools PeerMark and Grademark both enable
timely, personalised, information-rich feedback
Potential to act as catalyst for improvement of assessment criteria and procedures
Promising contribution to efficiency requirement