html5-img
1 / 16

Our research project & aims for this workshop

Lessons learned from our FDTL5 project: Engaging Students with Assessment Feedback FDTL Final Conference November 2009 Dr Jill Millar & Dr Karen Handley jmillar@brookes.ac.uk & khandley@brookes.ac.uk. Our research project & aims for this workshop. Research project

callie
Download Presentation

Our research project & aims for this workshop

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation 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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Business School Lessons learned from our FDTL5 project:Engaging Students with Assessment FeedbackFDTL Final ConferenceNovember 2009Dr Jill Millar & Dr Karen Handley jmillar@brookes.ac.uk & khandley@brookes.ac.uk

  2. Our research project & aims for this workshop • Research project • Investigate and encourage the adoption of feedback practices which support student engagement • Share understandings of the student experience in HE • The 4 stages of our research • 35 student and staff interviews; 760 questionnaires on student views on different types of feedback (2006-7) • 7 case studies with 3 partner HE institutions (2006-7) • 5 cascade partner initiatives in 5 HE institutions (2007-8) • 12 transferability partner micro case studies in 5 HEIs (2008-9) • Aims for this workshop • Lessons learned about our 'cascade' partner approach • Lessons learned - and questions still remaining - about how to research students' experiences of feedback [access & methodology] Business School

  3. Our cascade approach - structure Business School

  4. Our cascade approach – benefits and tensions Benefits Broadening and deepening of ideas Broadening and deepening of involvement Testing and re-testing of methods Tensions Heterogeneity of results: less robust? Communication? Control! Business School

  5. Lessons and questions about our methodology: (1) talking to students … • Ethical considerations: • Dependency • Power relationships • Our ethics committee regulations • Attracting interest: • Emails? • Talking to large groups • PC 'message of the day'; or links from VLE • Adverts • 'Willing to listen' lists • Recruitment by 'friendly' students? • Retaining interest: • Incentives? (lunch; digital recorders; vouchers?) - what else? • Logistics and timetables Business School 5

  6. Lessons and questions about our methodology: (1) talking to students … • Ethical considerations: • Dependency • Power relationships • Our ethics committee regulations • Attracting interest: • Emails? • Talking to large groups • PC 'message of the day'; or links from VLE • Adverts • 'Willing to listen' lists • Recruitment by 'friendly' students? • Retaining interest: • Incentives? (lunch; digital recorders; vouchers?) - what else? • Logistics and timetables Business School 9

  7. Lessons and questions about our methodology: (2) researching student engagement Business School 10

  8. Lessons and questions about our methodology: (2) researching student engagement Business School 11

  9. Lessons and questions about our methodology: (2) researching student engagement Business School 12

  10. Lessons and questions about our methodology: (2) researching student engagement • The need to consider the temporal and relational (sociocultural) dimensions of engagement (Price et al., 2009; Handley et al., 2009) • The need to (re)consider the appropriate unit-of-analysis and appropriate methods: • Individual properties vs processes of sociocultural activity (Matusov, 2009, p320) • Holism as ‘an impossible methodological task’ (Matusov, 2009, p323) • Impossibility of seeing context; but can we see the ‘seeds of time’ (Mercer, 2009) • ‘Planes of analysis’ (Rogoff, 1995) [UoA is never self-contained and is always part of a bigger system which has to be considered] Business School 13

  11. Lessons and questions about our methodology: (2) researching student engagement • The need to consider the temporal and relational (and sociocultural) dimensions of engagement (Price et al., 2009; Handley et al., 2009) • The need to (re)consider the appropriate unit-of-analysis and appropriate methods • Choices we’re still thinking about: Business School 14

  12. Lessons and questions about our FDTL project: Engaging students with assessment feedback • Lessons learned: • Benefits and tensions in using a cascade approach • The need to reconsider our unit-of-analysis • Questions ... • How can we attract student involvement in our research? • What methods give us a window onto the relational and temporal dimensions of student engagement with feedback? Business School 15

  13. References • Handley, K., Price, M. & Millar, J. (2009 in submission) ‘Beyond 'doing time': investigating the concept of student engagement with feedback’ • Matusov, E. (2009) ‘In search of ‘the appropriate’ unit of analysis for socio-cultural research’, Culture and Psychology, 13, 3, 307-333 • Mercer, N. (2008) ‘The seeds of time: Why classroom dialogue needs a temporal analysis’, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 33-59 • Price, M., Handley, K. & Millar, J. (2009 in submission) ‘Feedback - focussing attention on engagement’ • Rogoff, B. (1995) ‘Observing sociocultural activity on three planes’. In J V Wertsch et al., Sociocultural studies of mind. New York: Cambridge University Press Business School 16

More Related