Marking Guides and Effective Feedback. Frances Chetwynd . Talk outline. My COLMSCT Project Proposal for TU100 new Assessment and Tutor Guides A TU100 example. COLMSCT Project. Assessment feedback – a new taxonomy The survey : tutor attitudes to feedback and marking guides
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
(Brown & Glover 2006)
Refer to assignment just completed
Points out omissions, misconceptions, etc.
Explain how answer could have been improved
How concepts and skills can be applied in future
Clarify concepts and avoid future errors
T175 tutors – 140 distributed, 70 respondents
Marking guides –
a brief analysis
Award up to 4 marks. 1 mark for correct use of scientific notation, 2 for correct conversions of KB and Mbps and 1 for answer.
File size = 42KB = 42 x 1024 x 8bits = 344 064 bits
Download speed = 0.9Mbps = 0.9 x 106 bps
Time to download = file size/ speed
= 344 064/(0.9 x 106) = 382 293 x 10-6 s
= 3.82 x 10-1 s
Award high marks for clear and well structured notes suitable for intended audience. Give fewer marks if students use jargon, acronyms or unexplained technical concepts, but also use this as a teaching point about writing for specific audiences. Also do not award full marks to students that use full sentences rather than notes, as required.
Do not deduct any marks if students go over the suggested 200 word limit but explain the importance of word limits in TMAs and generally.
TU100 – the proposal
Transforming retention and progression in a new Level 1 course
Brown, E. and Glover, C. (2006) ‘Evaluating written feedback’, in Bryan, C. & Clegg, K. (Eds) Innovative Assessment in Higher Education Abingdon, Routledge, pp 81 – 91
Gibbs, G & Simpson, C. (2004) ‘Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning’. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education 1 pp3 – 31
Hounsell, D. (2007)‘Towards more sustainable feedback’, in Boud, D. & Falchikov, N. (Eds) Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education. Abingdon, Routledge, pp 101 - 113
Huxham, M. (2007) ‘Fast and effective feedback: are model answers the answer?’ Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32:6 pp 601 – 611
Nicol, R. & 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
Nicol, R. (2008) ‘Transforming assessment and feedback: Enhancing integration and empowerment in the first year.’ Quality Assurance Agency, Scotland.
Sadler, D. R. (1989) ‘Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems’. Instructional Science 18 pp 119 - 144
Walker, M. (2009) ‘An investigation into written comments on assignments: do students find them usable?’ Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 34:1 pp 67 - 78