Content of Feedback
“Feedback works best when it makes a clear statement of intent, is focused, and constructive. It doesn’t work when it is vague, negative and obtuse. So far, so obvious. Yet this chimes with wider discourses concerning the ‘mismatch’ of tutors’ and students’ perceptions of learning. For example, Clerehan (2002, p.80) describes the problem of tutors’ ‘vague exhortations’ when it comes to assessment advice, and Blair’s own warning about tutors’ somewhat complacent assumptions that students shared their perceptions.”
I definitely can relate to this. When Time is tight, and marking turn around even tighter, I can remember times when I have streamlined my written feedback, particularly as a HPL, when all the hours have been ‘used up’ for teaching delivery.
I also think that within performance, there is sometimes a difficultly in relating the Learning Outcomes in tangible and perceivable assessment criteria, which students can relate to, as often UALs criteria is very design based. This means spending a great deal of time trying to put into words that are accessible and feedback, that feeds forwards and is helpful, and not just a copy past of an assessment rubric.
I also think that the minute a grade is involved in feedback, it is harder for students to relate to feedback. For example, “you showed good evidence of knowledge when ….,” will refer to a C grade with regards to the assessment criteria. I find, often students think “good” will be a B or an A. Theres a mismatch here, as perhaps, to students a C grade is no longer felt as ‘good’.
Feedback exchange: When to give feedback. This is very relevant, and tricky if you are hourly paid as the feedback is submitted, students move onto another unit, and I may not be around teaching in those months.
1:1 tutorials: Where and when possible, I’ve always been a fan of 1:1 tutorials, but, again, time and resources makes this a stress point, as Brooks rightly points out:
“Tutorials can be labour intensive for the tutor – as we all know, the ‘ten minute slot’ allotted to each student so that so many students can be seen per hour, inevitably overruns. Secondly, students may not need the tutorial, as much as they need support in knowing when and why to contact the tutor.
Feedback sessions
“Is there something to be gained here from supplementing, or even reconsidering, such sessions as primarily sessions of constructive peer support? In such sessions the emphasis could more usefully be on developing independent learning skills, and learning when and what questions are appropriate to ask, thus generating a sense of responsibility in/ownership of one’s learning? “
I very much support this notion. Learning how to give feedback, and practicing a constructive and communicative language is a key skill within theatre making that students need to learn. If this is embedded within the assessment system (like peer reviews etc), it’s a win win.
“Are we giving general advice on how to improve, to support their general progress? Or are we justifying the mark? “
I think we need to do both, we need to be clear why we are giving the grade we are giving, and how it relates to the learning outcomes, but also we should be giving a notion as to how work can be improved.
Discussions:
I thought about the role of technicians with in UAL, and how (or why) they currently don’t assess. This seems strange to me, as they are just as much on the ground and involved with the student work as academics. Surely this would avoid the hierarchy of lecturer v’s students, by adding a more holistic way of assessing. For example, technicians are well placed to asses process, as well as enquiry. Of course, this would lead to financial changes (and, for example, technicians being seen as grade 5 not grade 4 etc etc), but its food for thought.
I also often think, where are we assessing the “soft skills” (like, self awareness, self regulation, confidence, empathy etc etc). We do, by nature, its within collaboration (for example), and implicitly its within Process, but perhaps if soft skills were valued as much as hard skills, we would be more equipped to assess more holistically. This discussion emerged out of reading this article, but isn’t coherently related to it.