Maximising feedback opportunities Lyndsey Welch – Lecturer and ILT Coordinator in Sport, Exercise and Fitness Maximising the use of Mahara and TURNITIN.

Maximising feedback opportunities

Lyndsey Welch – Lecturer and ILT Coordinator in Sport, Exercise and Fitness

Maximising the use of Mahara and TURNITIN to encourage innovative and

high quality online feedback.

Session overview

• To introduce the potential of technologies namely TURNITIN and Mahara to maximise both formative and summative feedback quality and opportunities

• Case studies: - To share ideas on how Loughborough College have used these technologies

• To discuss current and potential uses of such tools in different sectors

• To summarise potential institutional and pedagogical affordances

• To offer insight into the other things to consider

Aim

Good feedback

The seven principles of good feedback (Nicol and MacFarlane-Dick 2006)

helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, expected standards)

facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning

delivers high quality information to students about their learning

encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning

encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem

provides opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance

provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

What is TURNITIN?

www.submit.ac.uk

• Online submission, plagiarism checker and grading tool

• Excellent assignment management tool

• Integration options; Blackboard, Blackboard CE/Vista, Moodle, ANGEL, and Desire2Learn.

• TURNITIN UK

• All HE assignments

• For all suitable file types

• Full process

How it has been used?TURNITIN

Feedback on TURNITIN

Strengths of feedback capability

Things to be aware of

• Ability to have pre-set quick marks and comments

• Consistency across markers

• Directive feedback possible

• Plagiarism checker

• Better grading/expectations through custom rubrics

• All features sit within the same upload system – submission, plagiarism, grading, feedback for students

• Depends on the version • Limited formatting• Cannot attach a file present• No formal IV process/log in• Doesn’t check spg

Weaknesses of feedback capability

• Basic plug in available for Moodle 2.0.

• Different benefits of new/old version

• Old version likely to stay until Sept 2012

1234567

Peermark on TURNITIN

• Opportunity for both formative summative feedback

• Many ways to assign papers • Peer support• Saves tutor time • Can be anonymous • Offers same platform as tutor

marking• Can extend to other type of

resources e.g. reviewing a Journal paper

Strengths

• Students reluctant to share work

• Slightly confusing to set up• Student still expect tutor

review

Weaknesses

Things to be aware of

Nb: Currently no available plug in for Moodle 2.0 that incorporates PeerMark. It is however in development

1234567

Mahara

What is Mahara?

Student centred e-portfolio system

Learners and staff can use Mahara to demonstrate their learning, skills and development and record their achievements over time to a selected audience.

Mahara – case study 1

Reflective blogs

• Period of extensive staff development as part of LSIS bid

• Reflective process over 6-7 weeks

• Technology ‘expert’ supported process by commenting on reflection offering ways to move forward.

Other examples

Further work

Employability skills – blog of skill development

Professional development for students

• Building criteria into the assessment grading grid to promote reflection

• Ways to build two way dialogue

Example

1234567

Mahara – case study 2

Supporting student work

• Used to support 1st time pass rates on Higher National Diploma.

• Final outcome – students to submit 4 views on different topics.

• Student share view with tutors

• Tutors give intermediate feedback on at least one occasion

• Students submit final assignment

• Extending this provision across other HND units

• Encouraging more formative feedback in other modules

Example

Future work 1234567

Supporting feedback

Other uses of Mahara for feedback

• Wiki type activities - getting small groups to work on developing a webpage on a certain topic.

• Then students can peer review each others work and post feedback.

Group work/Peer reviews

Things to be aware of

Feedback is private by default, but can be made public.  The owner of the content can then make it private – but this can’t be changed back once done.

Once left, feedback can’t be deleted/edited by the owner of the view/blog or by the leaver of the feedback – it can only be made private.

1234567

Discussion – enhancing feedback practices

Small groups

How could these be used to improve your current feedback practices? If you are already using it how does it improve your practice?

How do they compare to other tools you use? Share other good practice

Feedback

• One example of either from each group

- More timely and accessible feedback – enhance reflection

- More private feedback

- Access to potentially more feedback from a range of sources

- Online feedback improves common issues such as illegibility of writing and gives options for student to increase size of font etc…

- Directive feedback

- More opportunity to reflect

Possible pedagogical benefits

Possible institutional benefits

Efficiency

• The potential of peer feedback reduces the pressures on staff time.

• Reduces the need for admin support collating assignments/returning assignments to students

• More flexible access to assignments for marking

Consistency

• Quickmarks in TURNITIN – can be pre loaded• Rubrics for grading grids • Open access to view other tutors marking – also means more

effective monitoring and allowing interventions• Template views can be set up in Mahara

Final thoughts – practical application

Other tools – Quia/Hot Potatoes/VLE software

Institutional and pedagogical aims

Platform differences

Automated vs. manual options

Version differences

Cohort sizes/type: cost-benefit analysis

Polices/procedures

Questions and contact details

Questions

Contact details

Lyndsey Welch

Loughborough College

Radmoor Road

Le11 3bt

Email: [email protected]

References/useful paper

References

Other interesting papers on this topic

Nicol, D. and MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education 31(2): pp. 199-218.

Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J. and O'Donovan, B. (2010). Feedback: all that effort but what is the effect? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 35(3): pp. 277-289.

Rolfe, V. (2010). Can Turnitin be used to provide instant formative feedback? British Journal of Educational Technology. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01091.

Shortis, M. and Burrows, S. (2009). A review of the status of online, semi-automated marking and feedback systems. Proceedings of: ATN Assessment Conference 2009: Assessment in Different Dimensions. Melbourne, Australia, pp. 302-312.

Yorke, J., Gibson, W. and Wilkinson, H. (2010). Towards sustainable marking practises and improved quality of feedback in short-answer assessments. ATN Assessment Conference. Sydney, Australia.