FeedForward & Recursive Feedback for Practice Learning

Debbie HolmesOn behalf of Dr Sandie Sandbrook &

Karen Bartter

Evidence for Practice Learning

• Develop a portfolio using PebblePad

• Have at least 1 piece of written evidence for each placement learning outcome (PLO)

• 18 PLOS = at least 18 unique pieces of evidence

• Must include 4 reflections of 1500 words

• Students built their portfolios they learnt the system

• Share with your mentor/mentors and your personal teacher

• Not graded at that time, but required to pass practice

The issues with the reflections:

• Students did not understand feedback• Students did not know what was required • A full draft facility was in place resulting in

feedback being written twice• First assignment due whilst on placement

following only a short university block at start of course

• Students often made the same mistakes across modules

What was required

• A more formalised formative process for the first reflection

• Reduce the draft marking as all 4 reflections were being marked

• A way of enhancing the assistance to help students to make sense of their practice learning

• To create dialogue between personal teacher and student

• To help the student understand the feedback

Student

• Gains practice experience• Submits reflection to PebblePad

Tutor

• Marks, provides detailed feedback and a grade• Identifies 3 areas to improve• Loads the feedback onto the asset in PebblePad

Student

• Access their work on PebblePad and digest the feedback• Attend a face to face 15 minute interview with tutor• Explain what they understood by the feedback• Explain what they needed to do to improve the grade

The Process

Student

• Submit with highlighted changes• Submit with no changes

Tutor

• Visits the 3 areas changed, decides if requirements met • Put the grade up one grade band or leaves the same• Provides a validation statement for the ones with no changes

Student

• Only submits 500 word formative for remaining reflections• Reviews all feedback from all modules with tutor prior to

commencing next academic year

Successes

• 53% (n=43) of the students raised their average grade for the 3 remaining reflections

• 12% (28%) maintained the standard of the first • 19% (n=8) produced a lower average grade • Less marking of draft work• More formalised formative process• Early identification of students at risk

Successes

• The cohorts involved in the process have demonstrated improved grades with reflective writing compared to those students who had the full draft facility for all of the reflections

• The students had reduced journeys to University on days off or after shifts as no collection of work required and the tutors visited the placement area for the face to face meeting

Non proven & unexpected gains

Even the students who received a B grade wished to try for an ATaking a student out of the process if the work was really poor enabled focussed support early in the programmeStudents appear to appreciate the annual review of all of the feedback

Added value

• Where mentors were actively involved by reading and providing feedback to students in PebblePad there was evidence of learning for them too

• The tripartite approach to supporting the student was enhanced and more transparent

Where are we now and where are we going?

• The process remains in the new curriculum

• Has worked well with an essay too

• Portfolio now graded• PP3 could make the

process more efficient as the workspace pause function would be a useful tool