| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Finally, you can manage your Google Docs, uploads, and email attachments (plus Dropbox and Slack files) in one convenient place. Claim a free account, and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio (from the makers of PBworks) can automatically organize your content for you.

View
 

Feedback

Page history last edited by marj.kibby@newcastle.edu.au 11 years, 8 months ago

Assessment Cycle: Reporting/Feedback

 

Participants

Beverley Oliver

Robyn Benson

Jenny Buckworth

Glenn Finger

Ashley Holmes

Marjorie Kibby

Scribe: Paulette Kelly 

 

The task for this small group discussion is to build on the recommendations identified in the morning session and consider how these might be applied at the reporting and feeding back stage in the assessment cycle. In this session, the aim is to identify general recommendations, rather than technology-specific ones.

 

 

Scribe notes:

Agreed Scope for discussion; The stage in the assessment cycle we are looking at is reporting – feeding back the results.  Reporting is providing the results to students.  Reporting is also the process of getting results back to the students.  In scope is the feedback during the course.  Where an assessment is done based on Web2 – do we feedback using that technology or some other way?  Having provided that feedback to the students, how do you meet the universities formal procedures which are necessary for mediation? 

 

 

Do’s

Do be aware;

  • You currently need to manually connect informal Web 2.0 feedback with university reporting processes.
  • The contextualised Web 2.0 feedback and its distribution may conflict or be incompatible with hierarchical university reporting processes.
  • Of ownership issues over Web 2.0 content.

Do recognise the potential of Web 2.0 for providing results quickly.

Do promote maintenance of ethical standards – by example and otherwise. 

 

 

Don’t’s

Report a final grade to other students and the rest of the world. 

 

Marjorie – Traditionally an essay was submitted and you place comments on the actual paper.  You cannot do this in a blog.  I have students submit a file via Blackboard so I can mark it.  It contains details on the blog setup and the type of things they are likely to include in a blog.

Ashley – the individual students mark needs to be kept private.

Glenn- which stakeholders see a final grade?  You need to be aware of who is reading comments on Web 2 so that the student sees the results first. 

Key points raised;

  • Assessment is a private matter.

 

 

Marjorie – Need awareness of characteristics of the form, for example in Grademark if you allow the students to see the marks, the first assignment marked may be three weeks before the last. 

Glenn – some universities have rules that faculty board must convene before students see the marks.  Protocols vary between institutions.

Key points raised;

  • Assessment of web 2.0 technology projects must meet the university formal processes for delivering results.

 

 

Jenny – if you are blogging feedback, how do you capture it so that it forms the reporting for assessment? 

Ashley – At the moment you manually need to split group and individual marks.  I send an individual’s an e-mail with their mark.

Marjorie – currently uses grade book on Turnitin to provide feedback as part formal process - informal feedback uses the same interactive technology as the students.

Ashley noted that David Jones has created a system called BAM – to work with Noodle – providing feedback from prompted questions via blogs that is graded and provided back to students. 

Google Wave and other future social networks might address some of the issues related to compatibility with university formal processes.

Key points raised;

  • Reporting on assessment has two components, formal university procedures and informal rich developmental feedback.  The universities procedures must be met.

 

 

Marjorie – When the assessment task requires the student to say keep a critical diary of their learning, you can allow them to choose the technology for recording and presenting this.  However, linking various social networks with the universities formal system is going to be complicated.  

 

Glenn – The first time you use something, then students come to expect its availability across all disciplines.  Use of Web 2.0 wil come down to cultural change in the university.  Don’t look for a one size fits all solution to reporting feedback. 

Beverley - University reporting is steeped in tradition – University assessment is hierarchical and traditional.  It is a process which the universities want to control. 

 

Key points raised;

  • Contextualised feedback conflicts with the traditional process for reporting grades – awareness of this point is needed.
  • Use the technologies to provide the contextual feedback where possible.
  • Be aware of new social networking technologies such as Google Wave

 

 

Jenny - There is a risk of students undermining the academic process for providing feedback – students could agree on what constitutes a pass, credit etc. and dispute on mass the grading applied to a blog or students contribution to a blog.  These discussions can take place on the blog.

Glenn – It is difficult to be coercive in a Web 2.0 environment.  The nature of social networking is the informality of it.

Ashley – We need to promote maintenance of ethical standards. 

Ashley – Markers must also be aware of being sensitive when posting comments.  They also need to be aware of defamation issues, discrimination etc.  Ethical standards need to apply. 

Group discussion; We need to understand copyright when providing feedback on these technologies – who owns the wiki, blog and so forth?

Marjorie – Does control of an academic blog – by setting up digital citizenship guidelines - introduce censorship. 

Key points raised

  • Maintenance of ethical standards needs be promoted.

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.