Enhancing student feedback through digital audio technology; an

evaluation of staff & student experience

Derek France (d.france@chester.ac.uk)Kenny Lynch (klynch@glos.ac.uk)

GEES NSS ConferenceManchester November 2010

Assessment – central to the student experience:• “frames learning, creates learning activity and orients all

aspects of learning behaviour” (Gibbs, 2006, 23).

Feedback – central to learning from assessment:• “feedback quantity and quality are the probably the most

important factors in enhancing students’ learning (Race, 1999, 27).

However:• “the literature on student experiences of feedback tells a

sorry tale” (Handley et al, 2007, 1).

• “many students commented on ‘cryptic’ feedback which often posed questions, but gave no indication of where they went wrong”(GfK, 2008, 8)

Brief context: assessment and feedback

Provisional sector results 2009+2010 (Full time totals)

• ‘Greater focus on technology will produce real benefits for all’ (Department of Education and Skills, UK, 2005, p.2)

• HEFCE, UK (2009, p.6) more cautiously states that, ‘focus should be on student learning rather than on developments in technology per se, enabling students to learn through, and be supported by technology’

• Prensky (2009) now advocates ‘Digital Wisdom’and ‘Digital Enhancement’

Brief Context: Literature

Model 1:SupportLectures

Model 2:Support

Fieldwork

Model 5:Assessment

Tool

Screencasting,podcating lectures

Lecturesummaries

Pre-lecturelistening materials

(complex concepts)

“iWalk”: Location-based

information

Instruction ontechnique &

equipment use

Video footageprepare for

field trip

Model 4:Support

Practical-basedLearning

Model 3:Support

3-DimensionalLearning

Model 6:Provide

Feedback

Lecture recordings

DigitalStory-telling

AnatomicalSpecimens

(Structures, tissues,dissections)

Softwareteaching & learning(replace text-based

instructions)

Student-created

podcast based on

field trips

Student-created

podcast to address

climate change

Model 7:Supplement

Lectures

Bring topical issues

Guidance & tipsAssessment tasks

SupplementOnline teaching

SkillsDevelopment

Models of Podcasting (Nie, 2007)

Chester examples

One year, 2008 – 2009:• Two modules – Level 4 (69 students); Level 6 (34

students).• One formative and summative assessment exercises

(L6) & four generic large group feedback opportunities (L4).

For each assignment:• Summative (Sm) -generic overview commentary

combined with bespoke feedback on the group presentation

• Formative (Fm) - informal podcast based on the e-postcard

• Sm and Fm sent to the feedback section of each student’s VLE-based e-portfolio

• Larger group generic feedback of four coursework assessments and placed in the online module space.

The case study

•Feedback portal within the institutional VLE

•Upload via modular e-learning areas

Feedback Uploading & Tracking

Formative Feedback

N = 87 by Wordle.net

Summative Feedback

N = 87

Generic Large Group Feedback

N = 90

Gloucestershire examples

Project aims

GEES-funded small project November 2008 – March 2009, with the aims to:

• develop a straightforward procedure for creating and delivering audio feedback;

• follow a group of academics through the process of introducing audio feedback in a range of modules; and

• evaluate the experience

Project members

• Bill Burford (Landscape)• James Kirwan (CCRI)• Dave Milan (Geography)• Chris Short (Geography)• Claire Simmons (Broadcast Journalism)• Elisabeth Skinner (Community Development)• Alan Howe (Social Work)

Staff responses and Issues• Initially added to workload, but as become used to it,

generally perceived as neutral [maximum?]• Initial concern about content preparation, led to scripting,

but gradually moved towards notes/marking sheets and spontaneous recording [skill development and confidence]

• Concerns about accuracy of delivery – mistakes were made in sending to students

• Need for careful management of the medium – tone of voice, intimacy, trust

• Quality – FASQ, mark moderating

• Security, privacy & identity – misdirected files, archive, anonymous marking, team-based feedback

• Handling grades – on recording or on work?

• Embedding in practice - 12 months later staff still using the technologies

More personalised:• “This feedback felt that the work had really been looked at and

evaluated personally.”• ‘I listened to this at home and it felt like you were in the room with me and

I wasn’t totally comfortable with that’.

More understandable?• You get “the tone of voice with the words so you could

understand the importance of the different bits of feedback.”Responsiveness to receiving information verbally:• “Don’t just briefly read it, you actually listen to it and take it in.”

” • “Better, goes in more. Can remember feedback from podcast

but not from written.” Greater sensitivity to the spoken word:• ‘I liked the feedback for what it was, but I also found it a bit depressing. It

was very personal… I felt I let you down’.• “May be harder to hear a poor mark, rather than receiving it in

writing.”

Nature and content of the feedback

Conclusions• Students valued the medium as well as

the message [Large, Generic Formative]

• Staff found it easier than expected after initial concerns – liked it and if carefully set up may save time

• NSS results highlight feedback as an issue; these pilots suggest this technology may increase student engagement with feedback and raise satisfaction in the lowest scoring NSS areas.

• Department for Education and Skills (2005) Harnessing technology transforming learning and children’s services Available online at http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/e-strategy/ (accessed 6nd April 2008).

• France, D., and Ribchester, C. (2008) Podcasts and Feedback. In Salmon, G., Edirisingha, P. (Ed.) Podcasting for Learning in Universities, pp. 70-79. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

• France, D., and Wheeler, A. (2007) Reflections on Using Podcasting for Student Feedback. Planet 18, 9-11. http://www.gees.ac.uk/pubs/planet/p18/df2.pdf

• Gibbs, G. (2006). How assessment frames student learning. In C. Bryan and K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative Assessment in Higher Education (pp 23-36). London: Routledge.

• GfK (2008) NUS/ HSBC Students Research. GfK Financial London, Study Number 154021

• Handley, K., Szwelnik, A., Ujma, D., Lawrence, L., Millar, J. & Price. M. (2007). When less is more: Students’ experiences of assessment feedback. Paper presented at the Higher Education Academy Annual Conference, July 2007. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/events/conference/E5.doc

• HEFCE. (2009). E-learning strategy. Retrieved August 20, 2009 from www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2005/05_12/

• Nie, M. (2007). Podcasting for GEES Subjects. Paper presented at the IMPALA 2 workshop, Dec 2007. Retrieved June 5, 2008 from http://www2.le.ac.uk/projects/impala2/presentation/2nd%20Workshop/Presentations/Ming%20Nie

• Prensky, M. (2009) H. Sapiens Digital: From Digital Immigrants and Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom. Innovate, 5, No3, pp1-9. (accessed 20th August 2009). http://innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=705&action=article

• Race, P. (1999). Enhancing student learning. Birmingham: SEDA.

• Salmon, G. & Edrisingha, P. (2008). Eds. Podcasting for Learning in Universities. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Including companion website: http://www.atimod.com/podcasting/index.shtml

References