Partnership with students in designing feedback processes for large classes

1. Partnership with students in
designing feedback processes
for large classes
David Carless,
University of Hong Kong,
@CarlessDavid
Queensland University of
Technology
October 31, 2019
The University of Hong Kong

3. Overview
1. Conceptualizing feedback processes
2. Towards feedback as partnership
3. Example with a large class
4. Teacher & student feedback literacy
5. Implications for practice
The University of Hong Kong

4. Key issue 1
How might feedback processes become
(more of) a partnership between teachers
and students?
The University of Hong Kong

5. Key issue 2
How might feedback processes be
implemented efficiently & effectively in large
classes?
The University of Hong Kong

6. Broad Challenge 1
The feedback literature has moved fwd …
but teachers & students may not have been
brought along with it (Dawson et al., 2019)
The University of Hong Kong

7. Impetus for change
Teachers think their feedback is more useful
than their students do (Carless, 2006)
The University of Hong Kong

8. Feedback graveyards
The University of Hong Kong

9. Challenge 2: Iron Triangle
(cf. Ryan et al., 2019)
The University of Hong Kong
Quality
Time Cost

10. Sustainable feedback
Enhancing student autonomy to learn
independently, generate & use feedback
(Carless et al. 2011)
The University of Hong Kong

11. CONCEPTUALIZING
FEEDBACK PROCESSES
The University of Hong Kong

12. Feedback as information
Information about performance or
understanding (Hattie & Timperley, 2007)
The University of Hong Kong

13. Limits of ‘Teacher-telling’
Students are not well-equipped to decode or
act on unilateral teacher transmission of
information (Sadler, 2010)
The University of Hong Kong

14. Social constructivist
Action on feedback is constructed through
learner agency & interaction (O’Donovan,
Rust & Price, 2016).
Learning constructed within the mind of the
individual through social interaction
The University of Hong Kong

15. Shared responsibilities
Shared responsibilities in the giving &
receiving of feedback (Nash & Winstone,
2017)
The University of Hong Kong

16. Sociocultural
Meaning-making of feedback is mediated via
activity within social and cultural contexts
(Esterhazy & Damşa, 2019)
Learning situated within activity, context &
culture
The University of Hong Kong

17. Situated & relational
Feedback unfolds within disciplines through
social encounters between participants and
resources (Esterhazy, 2018)
The University of Hong Kong

18. TOWARDS STUDENTS AS
PARTNERS IN FEEDBACK
PROCESSES
The University of Hong Kong

19. Partnership in feedback
Student input on preferred types, modes &
timing of feedback;
Students requesting feedback on self-
identified issues (interactive coversheets)
(Carless, 2019b)
The University of Hong Kong

20. Students as co-researchers
Projects involving teachers & students as
co-researchers of feedback processes
The University of Hong Kong

21. DESIGNING EFFECTIVE
FEEDBACK PROCESSES
The University of Hong Kong

22. The University of Hong Kong
DISCOUNT CODE:
FLR40

23. Designing effective
feedback processes
The University of Hong Kong
Chapter 2
Chapter 9 Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Designing effective
feedback processes

24. EXAMPLE FROM CHAPTER 4
PSYCHOLOGY OF HEALTH BEHAVIOR –
1300 STUDENTS
DEAKIN UNIVERSITY
The University of Hong Kong

25. The University of Hong Kong

26. Assessment design
Online quizzes 10%
Three linked journal entries 45%
Final exam 45% (applying knowledge learnt
in journals)
The University of Hong Kong

27. Aligned assessment design
3 journal entries where students produce 2
minute video & reflect on their health
behavior changes (800 words)
The University of Hong Kong

28. Criteria & exemplars
Video explanation of rubric
+
Online exemplar
The University of Hong Kong

29. 3 forms of feedback
1. Grade aligned with rubric
2. Written explanation linked to LOs
3. 5 minute audio file (25 sessional staff)
The University of Hong Kong

30. Audio feedback
Timely: 7 days before next entry is due
Enables rapport &
nuance
You can talk faster than you can write
The University of Hong Kong

31. Analysis
Task sequence enables feedback uptake
Use of audio feedback
Mainly ‘Teacher-telling’
The University of Hong Kong

32. ALTERNATIVES AND
ADDITIONAL POSSIBILITIES
The University of Hong Kong

33. Audio peer feedback
Activating student evaluative judgment
Comparing own work with that of peers
(Filius et al., 2019)
The University of Hong Kong

34. Peer video feedback
Peer-to-peer video feedback delivered via
Facebook
Hung (2016)
The University of Hong Kong

35. Composing peer feedback
Providing feedback more cognitively engaging
than receiving feedback (e.g. Nicol et al., 2014)
The University of Hong Kong

36. Training & coaching
Students need to be trained & coached in
how to carry out peer feedback (Professor
Min,Taiwan, chapter 8)
The University of Hong Kong

37. Cumulative peer feedback
Need for multiple cumulative experiences of
peer review during a programme
(Harland, Wald & Randhawa 2017).
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3

38. Flipped feedback
Guidance rather than post hoc feedback
Students want more support during the
assessment process … & less at its end
(Carless, 2019b)
The University of Hong Kong

39. Exemplars implementation
The University of Hong Kong
Assessment task
Students devise
or work with
criteria for good
task response
Two samples
read before class
Peer discussion
Teacher-led
dialogue
Student action
plans

40. Good Exemplars dialogue
• Airs multiple & divergent viewpoints
• Makes explicit some key qualities of
exemplars (Carless & Chan, 2017)
The University of Hong Kong

41. TEACHER & STUDENT
FEEDBACK LITERACY
The University of Hong Kong

42. Feedback literacy
Know-how about how to maximise the
benefits of feedback processes
The University of Hong Kong

44. Student feedback literacy
The University of Hong Kong
Making
Judgments
Appreciating
Feedback
Managing
Affect
Taking Action
(Carless & Boud, 2018)

45. Conclusions
The University of Hong Kong

46. Feedback that makes a difference
The University of Hong Kong

47. Feedback as action
Learners use inputs to close feedback loops
(Boud & Molloy, 2013) or longer-term
feedback spirals (Carless, 2019a)
The University of Hong Kong

48. Recommendations
Design for student uptake
Minimise teacher telling
Involve students actively
Mutual development of feedback literacy
The University of Hong Kong

49. References
Boud, D. & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712.
Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2),
219-233.
Carless, D. (2019a). Feedback loops and the longer-term: Towards feedback spirals. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(5), 705-714. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1531108
Carless, D. (2019b). A longitudinal inquiry into students’ experiences of feedback: A need for teacher-
student partnerships. Higher Education Research and Development.
Carless, D. & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of
feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
Carless, D. & K.K.H. Chan (2017). Managing dialogic use of exemplars. Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education, 42(6), 930-941.
Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M. & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies
in Higher Education, 36(4), 395-407.
Dawson, P., Henderson, M., Mahoney, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2019). What
makes for effective feedback: staff and student perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 44(1), 25-36.
Esterhazy, R. (2018). What matters for productive feedback? Disciplinary practices and their relational
dynamics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1302-1314.
The University of Hong Kong

50. References
Esterhazy, R., & Damşa, C. (2019). Unpacking the feedback process: An analysis of undergraduate
students’ interactional meaning-making of feedback comments. Studies in Higher Education, 44(2),
260-274.
Filius, R. et al. (2019). Audio peer feedback to promote deep learning in online education. Journal of
Computer Assisted Learning. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12363
Harland, T., Wald, N., & Randhawa, H. (2017). Student peer review: Enhancing formative feedback
with a rebuttal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(5), 801-811.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-
112.
Hung, S.-T.A. (2016). Enhancing feedback provision through multimodal video technology. Computers
& Education, 98, 90-101.
Nash, R., & Winstone, N. (2017). Responsibility-sharing in the giving and receiving of assessment
feedback. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1519. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01519
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A
peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122.
O’Donovan, B., Rust, C., & Price, M. (2016). A scholarly approach to solving the feedback dilemma in
practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 938–949.
Ryan, T., French, S., & Kennedy, G. (2019). Beyond the Iron Triangle: Improving the quality of
teaching and learning at scale. Studies in Higher Education.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1679763
Winstone, N., & Carless, D. (2019). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A
learning-focused approach. London: Routledge.
The University of Hong Kong

51. THANK YOU
The University of Hong Kong

52. Information  action
(Winstone & Carless, 2019)
The University of Hong Kong

53. Screencast feedback
Digital recording of users’ screen combined
with voice narration
The University of Hong Kong

54. The University of Hong Kong