using grademark to improve feedback and engage students in the marking process
TRANSCRIPT
+Using GradeMark to improve feedback and engage students in the marking process
Dr Sara MarshamSchool of Marine Science & [email protected]
Dr Alison GrahamSchool of [email protected]
Symposium on Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
10th - 12th November 2016
@sara_marine@alisonigraham
+
+ Aims of Project Initial aims: To engage students in the entire marking process from the setting of marking criteria through the receipt and feed-forward application of feedback
To write/design effective marking criteria that are specific to pieces of work
To engage students in the process of using marking criteria in preparation for an assignment
To provide feedback on coursework that links directly to marking criteria
Use GradeMark to develop libraries of feedback comments that can function much like dialogue with students
Implicit questions in our original proposal:
1. Can we involve students in writing marking criteria?
2. What do students already know about marking criteria?
3. Can typed (even repeated!) comments work like a dialogue? Will students recognise this?
+Bioremediation (Biology Level 6)/Reflective log (Marine Science Level 5)/Microbiology (Biology Level 4)
Aim 1: Write new marking criteria
Understand students’ prior
knowledge/create new assignment
Write new marking criteria
(based on student
knowledge)
Engage students
with criteria
+Microbiology - Lab report focus group
If students do not know what a ‘scientific paper’ is, and have never read a peer-reviewed article, then how can the marking criteria be used to make expectations clear?
+Aim Two: Engaging students with marking criteria
+Aim Two: Engaging students with marking criteria
Objective #1 - to help students understand the wording in the marking criteria
Objective #2 - to encourage students to start differentiating between the descriptions of different grade boundaries and spotting what will help them to achieve high marks
Objective #3 - to engage students in the practice of peer marking (marking existing student work against the set of criteria)
+Microbiology - Lab report tutorial sessionIf students do not know what a ‘scientific paper’ is, and have never read a peer-reviewed article, then how can the marking criteria be used to make expectations clear?
I have read a research paper published in a peer-reviewed journal.
1. Yes2. I’ve read some but
found them difficult to understand
3. No4. I’m not sure what
you mean by a peer-reviewed journal
Write your report “in the format of a scientific paper” – do you know what this means?
1. Yes2. No3. To some
extent
+Microbiology - Marking criteria session
1. 0-39%2. 40-49%3. 50-59%4. 60-69%5. 70-100%
Into what grade boundary would results example 1 fall?
Which title scored the highest?
1. Example 12. Example 23. Example 3
+Bioremediation - Marking criteria session
+Reflective log - Marking criteria session
1 2 3 4 5 6
34%
59%
7%
0%0%0%
1. 1, 2, 32. 1, 3, 23. 2, 1, 34. 2, 3, 15. 3, 1, 26. 3, 2, 1
1 2 3 4 5 6
0%
36%
0%
12%
52%
0%
1 2 3 4 5 6
17%
25%
8%
4%
8%
38%
1, 3, 2
3, 1, 2
1, 2, 3
Situation/Task Action Result
+Reflective log - Marking criteria session
+Aims Three and Four: Use GradeMark to provide feedback linked to marking criteria
GradeMark is:
• Part of Turnitin software, accessed at Newcastle University through VLE (Blackboard)
• A platform through which students submit coursework online as Word document or PDF (or in other file formats)
• A platform through which markers can provide three types of feedback:o In-text comments: Bubble comments, Text comments, QuickMark
commentso Rubrico General comments: Voice comments and Text comments
+GradeMark Go to Assessment inbox See submissions, similarity score
and marks (once graded) for the whole class
Check if student has viewed their feedback
+Library comment
Text comment
Bubble comment
Final comment
Using GradeMark: Types of Comments
+QuickMarks
+QuickMarks
+Highlighting/colour-coding
+Mark against a rubricAdd assignment-specific, module-specific, School or Faculty-wide marking criteria
Mark each piece of work according to the rubric; use qualitatively or quantitatively
+Turning criteria into comments
S/T
A
R
1 2 3 4 5 6
+Creating own library Each comment linked to one of the criterion with
letter and number
For each component, comment on: How student meets criterion
What student could have done to achieve next grade boundary
R 4
R 5
+Mark work using criteria
+Final general comments
Voice (up to three minutes) Text (up to 5,000 characters)
+Final mark
+Student feedback - Reflective log
+What did the students think?
75% found it useful to have the marking criteria in advance
100% thought it was useful to see how they performed against the marking criteria
53-100% preferred electronic feedback to feedback on a pro-forma or mark sheet
80-100% thought electronic marking encourages more positive feedback
50-100% found the comments to be specific to the piece of work
79-100% would like to have received more electronic feedback in other modules
+Student questionnaire - Bioremediation
+GradeMark analysis Number of students that receive different types of grammatical
comments - identify common errors e.g. punctuation Number of students that fall into each mark range for each
criterion
+GradeMark analysis
Grade range
% viewed feedback3.5 weeks
later6.5 months
later70-100% 84 8460-69% 46 6450-59% 49 5140-49% 48 520-39% 14 14
• Percentage of students that viewed feedback from microbiology report (2013-14 academic year; n = 184):• After 3.5 weeks• After 6.5 months
+Final reflections
Benefits - students’ perspective• Feedback is easier to read and is automatically saved online• Students can access feedback in private and on their own time• More positive feedback• Increased perceptions of fairness and transparency with rubric• More detailed
Benefits - markers’ perspective• No printing/scanning for retention• Linked to originality check• More detailed comments with less work• Library bank of comments helps to avoid repetition• Easy record of submission and return of feedback
+Final reflections & questions for you
Continued development of marking criteria and integration of criteria into additional modules
Further thought on what information/activities help students engage with the assessment process
Managing the challenges of staff and student engagement
Are there ‘good practice’ guidelines for writing marking criteria?
Can students be engaged to write the marking criteria themselves? If so, what strategies can be used to engage
students with criteria?
What is the balance between in-class time and independent engagement?
+Thank you for listening
Any questions?
Our thanks to all of our students who took part and shared their opinions
Thanks to Newcastle University Innovation Fund for funding the original work & ongoing supportDr Sara Marsham
School of Marine Science & [email protected]
Dr Alison GrahamSchool of [email protected]
Symposium on Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
10th - 12th November 2016
@sara_marine@alisonigraham
http://www.slideshare.net/SaraMarsham/presentations