As preparation for workshop 5, I was tasked with selecting a reading from a list with a synopsis provided of each. I chose Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick 2006 – Seven Principles of Good Feeback Practice as it was described as a ‘seminal work’ so it seemed like an important one to read.

As I am fairly new to teaching (less than 2 years), assessment and feedback is something that I have found both interesting and challenging. Currently I am responsible for marking around 20 – 25 end of unit assessments (a 2000 word report) as well as parity marking a further 4 assessments for the Hong Kong cohort. I also mark around 8 dissertations each year, each around 12,000 words. My unit also includes a presentation element which is formatively assessed.

The article puts for the idea that “while students have been given more responsibility for learning in recent years, there has been far greater reluctance to give them increased responsibility for assessment processes (even low-stakes formative processes).” It goes on to talk how the university learning experience should provide students with the ability to take responsiblity for their own learning to prepare them for life beyond university so therefore, they need opportunities to “develop the capacity to regulate their own learning” (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006).

This makes me think of the formative assessment in my Unit and how formative feedback on the presentation element could be improved upon. I haven’t always been clear of what is expected with me as a tutor with regards to formative feedback so this is something I will discuss further with the course leader.

Another point that I found interesting was; “there is strong evidence that feedback messages are invariably complex and difficult to decipher, and that students require opportunities to construct actively an understanding of them (e.g. through discussion) before they can be used to regulate performance” (Ivanic et al., 2000; Higgins et al., 2001). On my course, with the dissertation there is an opportunity for students to gain comprehensive feedback on a draft which is then discussed in a follow-up tutorial. It’s useful to know that this is an effective and evidence backed approach. Although comprehensive written feedback is provided on the end of unit 2000 word report, further verbal feedback is only available on request.

“Sadler (1989) identified three conditions necessary for students to benefit from feedback in academic tasks. He argued that the student must know: 

1. what good performance is (i.e. the student must possess a concept of the goal or standard being aimed for);
2. how current performance relates to good performance (for this, the student must be able to compare current and good performance);
3. how to act to close the gap between current and good performance…. Therefore teachers need to strengthen skills of self-assessment in their students.”

I tend to start my unit with the learning outcomes and at the end of the unit, I bring the students back to these learning outcomes again and we discuss how these relate to the assignment they have been set. The particular assignment brief for my unit also has the option to submit a ‘digital artifact’ in place of a written report. It is a bit of a vague brief so requires some further explanation. This year, in contrast to the previous year, 3 students submitted a recorded presentation rather than a written report. In terms of students having a clear expectation of what is expected of them, I could definitely go further in providing examples and inspiration so that they are clear on what an ‘excellent’ submission should include. From what I have read, simply presenting the learning outcomes may not be enough – it is important to ensure that students have a clear understanding of what they mean and how they relate to the course content.