1. 4 th & 5 th June 2015 Electronic Assessment Feedback Claire Farquharson, Edge Hill University SOLSTICE Conference 2015

2. With the paradigm shift towards a student centred approach to education (Rust, 2002) the role of assessment feedback on student learning continues to be discussed within the higher education sector (Ding, 1998; QAA, 2000; Higgins, 2010). This presentation aims to discuss the use of online assessment feedback to streamline specific and generic feedback in a well-timed, accessible and clear manner. It highlights the importance of feedback to assist student engagement, self-reflection and development whilst identifying the role grade centre can play with grade access and marking rubrics to assist transparency from the original module handbooks to assist a variety of assessment methods. ​ It identifies within the BSc (Hons) Sports Therapy programme the initial development of online marking rubrics and feedback, progressions and pitfalls and future considerations. Claire Farquharson

3.  To discuss the use of online assessment feedback to streamline specific and generic feedback in a well-timed, accessible and clear manner.  To identifying the role grade centre can play with grade access and marking rubrics  To discuss development to assist a variety of assessment methods. ​  To highlight pitfalls and future considerations. Claire Farquharson

4. “students perceive feedback into four main themes helpful to improve learning; too general or vague, lack guidance, focused on the negative or were unrelated to assessment criteria” (Weaver, 2006) Claire Farquharson QAA (2000) advises timeliness of feedback specifying the nature and extent for feedback relating to published assessment criteria the language assessment and study should normally be the same EHU: The Undergraduate Framework - ‘Lenses’ Teaching, Learning and Assessment Technology Enhanced Learning “students do read comments but do little with them” (Ding, 1998) “ although students have extrinsic motivation to meet assessment demands via a surface approach they want accurate feedback” (Ding, 1998) “students make an emotional investment in an assignment and want some return on that investment” (Higgins et al, 2010) “feedback doesn’t work students are more interested in their grade or mark and pay little attention to feedback” (Wojitas, 1998; Fritz, 1990)

5.  4 week release date  Marking Rubrics  Grade Access  Action Points Claire Farquharson  Self Reflection  Feedforward Specific Feedback QAA timeliness of feedback specifying the nature and extent for feedback relating to published assessment criteria the language assessment and study should normally be the same  Group Feedback  Key Points  Revision Generic Feedback

6. Claire Farquharson

7.  Set Up  Inputting  Development Claire Farquharson

8.  Positive student feedback  Reduced time inputting and feedback  Reduced tutorials and questioning  Once structure is set up can be exported across for the following year  Assists student reflection  Feedforward  Need to ensure access to ipads/phone devices  If students submit via TURNITIN cannot view marking rubric on Grade Centre  University are moving away from TURNITIN due to compatibility unless to check for originality

9. Claire Farquharson

10.  Ding, I (1998) Revisiting assessment and learning: implications of students’ perspectives on assessment feedback. Paper presented to Scottish Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Dundee, September 25-26, citied in Higgins, R, Hartley, P & Skeleton, A (2010) The conscientious consumer: Reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education 27 (1) 53-64  Dror, IE (2008) Technology enhanced learning; The good, the bad and the ugly. Pragmatics and Cognition 16 (2) 215-223  Higgins, R, Hartley, P & Skeleton, A (2010) The conscientious consumer: Reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education 27 (1) 53-64  QAA () UK Quality Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education: assessment of students. http://qaa.ac.uk/COPaosfinal/genprin/htm~fsphttp://qaa.ac.uk/COPaosfinal/genprin/htm~fsp  Weaver, M (2007) Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 31 (3) 379-394  Wojitas, O (1998) Feedback? No, just give us the answers. Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) http://www.thesis.co.uk:80/tp/1/PRN/SEARCH/indexa.htmlhttp://www.thesis.co.uk:80/tp/1/PRN/SEARCH/indexa.html Claire Farquharson