Talking Feedback: Using video to radically change essay marking by Emma Mayhew

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

On this day, exactly two years ago, I sat in my study staring at Blackboard. 212 little green symbols were showing in Grade Centre. 212 3,500 word essays needed to be marked in the next three weeks. And they didn’t just need marks. Each of them needed a page of rich, detailed feedback, often crucial to student attainment and important to student satisfaction. In the HE sector higher student numbers and increasing student expectations look set to intensify further the pressure to deliver numerous pieces of outstanding feedback within an increasingly tighter timeframe but a tiny number of us are looking at this differently. After years of marking over 200 essays at Christmas and over 200 at Easter I finally decided to radically change the delivery of feedback to students. Encouraged by the work of the ASSET project, a few pioneers in the sector and the success of my own screencast suite, I turned to screen capture technology. In December 2013, 25 students on one of my Part 3 modules didn’t get their normal A4 feedback sheet on Grade Centre. Instead they received their own individual 6-10 minute MP4 file via Blackboard. Each video showed my face and my cursor circling essay text as I talked through their coursework in detail…

TalkingFeedbackEmmaMayhew

…and follow on questionnaires revealed overwhelming student support. From 20 respondents, 18 said that video feedback was better than written feedback and 17 said they would prefer video feedback next time. At least two key themes emerged from student feedback:

Clarity-Students see markers highlighting specific sections of text as they comment while face to face contact reduces scope for misunderstanding and increase the sense of individual attention.

Depth- It takes me one hour to mark and provide written feedback on a 3,500 word essay. Video feedback didn’t actually save me any time. I still spent one hour on each essay but here is the difference-my written feedback contains an average of around 350-400 words. My video feedback contains an average of around 170 words per minute so that’s around 1,360 words in a typical 8 minute video feedback recording. This is 3 to 4 times more than students would normally receive and explains why 18 questionnaire respondents said that they received much more detailed feedback than they typically would via written comments.

OK I can’t mark in my pyjamas anymore but I’m willing to sacrifice this because my small scale study suggests that using simple screen capture software to create video feedback does allow us to give much more in-depth, personal and very specific feedback at no extra cost to staff time.

For further information on how to use free and simple screen capture software to create video feedback please click on my 90 second screencast (http://www.screencast.com/t/mUy4dDHFdnyv), part of a range of 1-2 minute ‘How to’ videos on the Reading GRASS screen capture website (http://blogs.reading.ac.uk/grass/).

HOT TIP: What do we know about the ‘attainment gap’ between Black and minority ethnic students and white students at the University of Reading by Dr Paddy Woodman

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

This is not a topic that has had much airing within the University and so it may not be well known to many. However, we have just completed a substantial project exploring the issue at Reading and are set to do more work in the near future in preparation for submitting an institution-wide application for the Race Equality Charter Mark (http://www.reading.ac.uk/internal/staffportal/news/articles/spsn-585983.aspx). I wanted to use this blog to share the key findings of the project with you.

 

The national picture

There is a long-standing national disparity in attainment at Higher Education. The proportion of white UK-domiciled students who graduate with first class or upper second class degrees is significantly higher than the proportion of black and minority ethnic (BME) students achieving the same classifications. The sector-wide attainment gap increased from 17.2% in 2003/04 to a peak of 18.8% in 2005/06 and now stands at 17.7% (ECU 2013). Although attainment levels for all students in the UK are rising, the gap between white and BME students is not closing, it hovers stubbornly around 18%.

What do BME students say about their experience of Higher Education?

Three key points emerge from NUS research (Race for Equality 2011)

  • Ethnic minority students report that they do not feel well prepared for University.
  • The narrative of not “fitting in” is strong amongst the UK’s BME students. This is attributed to a range of factors including: the low numbers of BME staff; the perception that they are expected to leave their identity at the classroom door, or that their lecturers are blind to their colour; the view that the curriculum does not reflect their diverse interests; the misaligned mutual expectations between staff and students particularly prevalent for students from under-represented groups in HE.
  • Issues to do with assessment and feedback are particularly keenly felt by BME students – primarily around transparency of expectations and perceived fairness in marking.

 

Findings from other research projects

Significant research has been undertaken to determine whether the disparity can be attributed to other factors, such as previous academic attainment. However, the results show that ethnicity is a significant factor in degree attainment even when a range of other social factors are controlled for (Broecke & Nicholls 2007). Meaning that there is something about the higher education experience that isn’t working as well for BME students as it is for white students.

However, it has proven difficult to identify specific causal factors, beyond the issues that BME students themselves raise (e.g. those cited above). In fact much research has concluded that the casual factors are diverse and complex reflecting the heterogeneous nature of BME students and the wide variety of potential influences on attainment.

There is further agreement that many staff lack confidence in supporting ethnically and culturally diverse students. Furthermore, it has been observed that the predominant model of student support, i.e. open door to be sought out by students, does not function well for the greater diversity of students in HE today. On the positive side though the most effective interventions are agreed to be mainstream initiatives that are accessible by all students and not ring fenced by ethnicity or any other demographic criteria. 

 

Key findings from within the University of Reading

  • In 2012/13 78% of white University of Reading graduates achieved a 1st or 2.1 in comparison to only 56% of our BME graduates.    
  • A key observation is that race is not something that has been discussed at Reading.
  • During the project few Schools reported an existing awareness of attainment disparity between BME and White students on their programmes.
  • Schools do recognise issues around supporting international students but few reported awareness of issues concerning BME students. This reflects a broader institutional tendency to focus on international students as a proxy for ethnic diversity
  • Many UoR staff felt that there was discomfort around discussing issues of race that often lead us to be silent on the matter, for fear of offending.
  • There is little diversity training (and little take up of what does exist) specifically relating to teaching and learning either for established or for new staff, yet there is anecdotal evidence that many staff feel ill equipped to support ethnically, racially and culturally diverse students.
  • Our internal monitoring processes do not assist us in identifying differential attainment by demographic group, which explains why many schools are unaware of the issue. 
  • Much of the visible and explicit activity that exists to actively foster a multi-cultural environment in the University is provided by RUSU (e.g. student societies, One World Week).
  • The University has two strategic agendas leading to the increasingly diversification of the student population within the University: “Internationalisation” is one and “Widening Participation” the other. There is no clear interface between the two agendas and, by and large, they operate independently of one other.

 

Patterns of attainment amongst Reading’s BME students

There are many challenges to undertaking robust quantitative statistical analysis of attainment in relation to ethnicity. The most significant are the comparatively small numbers of students that would recognise themselves as coming from the same ethnic group, but the issue of insectionality(1) is also important. Nevertheless Dr Karen Ayers applied her considerable statistical skills to the problem and devised an approach of ‘stacking’ UG leavers across the three years (increasing the population sizes). The resultant analysis showed:

  • that a similar attainment gap for UK BME students as exists for non-UK BME students.
  • The existence of attainment gaps for each of the Asian, black, Chinese, mixed and ‘other’ ethnic groupings
  • The existence of an attainment gap for all but two subjects in the University. 
  • That there is no obvious pattern in relation to the proportion of BME students or whether the subject is a more science/quantitative in nature
  • As has been demonstrated with national datasets, analysis of the UoR leavers dataset reveals that although there are a number of factors that are correlated with attainment, ethnicity was shown to be a significant and consistent factor for most schools when other factors (such as gender, disability, socio-economic status, age and previous educational attainment) were controlled for.
  • A detailed and innovative statistical case study undertaken with data from one school (using ‘Part’ and modular level results over a three year period) revealed an interested pattern of variable disparity in attainment for different modules. Furthermore it revealed that, for this School, Part 1 BME students displayed similar levels of attainment but a gap opened up and expanded in subsequent parts. (NB. This may not be the pattern across all schools)

An over-arching conclusion is that the observations and patterns revealed by this project have strong resonances with research carried out at a national level and at a number of other institutions (not necessarily similar HEIs). This does not let us off the hook, rather it emphasises the obligation for all universities to reflect on current practice both inside and outside of the classroom in order to better support, challenge and equip our BME students.  

The project report has been considered by the University Board for Teaching and Learning, the Widening Participation Group and the the University Equality and Diversity Committee. They will consider a range of proposed recommendations that aim to achieve five key objectives:

  • raise awareness of the attainment gap, both generally at an institutional level but also to ensure its visibility in regular monitoring and review processes at School and service level.
  • effect change in a number of targeted subjects likely to have impact on the largest numbers BME students
  • develop staff confidence and skills in supporting an ethnically and culturally diverse student community
  • strengthen ethnic minority student voice/representation
  • inform the work of the UoR Race Equality Charter Mark team

A group has been established to oversee the implementation of recommendations from the BME attainment project, however each and every one of us has a role to play in addressing this issue. If you have a teaching and learning role you can make a start by taking the following three steps that will have immediate benefit for BME students, but actually all of your students will benefit. 

1) Get to know your students – if you have a small group this might mean talking to them about what they are finding rewarding and what they are finding challenging. With larger groups you might need to depend on data about the cohort. Get to know the recurring trends in your student population and spend an hour researching the challenges encountered by the various student groups.

2) Identify aspects of the curriculum where you can incorporate opportunities for all students to bring their diverse cultural perspective to bear. Minority groups should not feel they have to leave their identities at the classroom door. 

3) Considering that BME students nationally report feeling ill prepared for HE, consider how you can ensure that each and every student has a good understanding of your expectations of them – how can you be really explicit? BME students are more likely to come from families with little HE experience, they are also more likely to enter the university with qualifications other than the traditional A-level.   

Inclusivity whether regarding race, gender, religion, disability, age, nationality, socio-economic background etc, is set to be a growing issue in Higher Education. As our student population becomes more diverse we must shift our institutional culture from regarding some students are having needs beyond the ‘norm’ to recognising that the student population is diverse and that our ‘normal’ teaching, student support and generally our ways of working need to cater for a wide range of needs. This is easy to say but a huge aspiration to deliver!

 

 ECU (2013) Equality in Higher Education Statistical Report 2013

NUS (2011) Race for equality: A report on the experiences of Black students in further and higher education. London: National Union of Students. Available from: http://www.nus.org.uk/PageFiles/12238/NUS_Race_for_Equality_web.pdf 

Broecke, S. and Nicholls, T. (2007) Ethnicity and Degree Attainment, DfeS Research Report (RW92), DfES http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/35284/1/Ethnicity_and_Degree_Attainment.pdf

 

  1. Intersectionality – the interconnected nature of social categorizations such as race, class, and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage.

Goodbye Word; hello floating islands, dolphins and rainbows by Dr Emma Mayhew

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

So you’re a lecturer at Reading and you find yourself going over and over information in handbooks, course outlines, books and journals with students-anything from tricky academic concepts to essay writing and ECFs. Of course it’s difficult in an age of information overload. Really important stuff gets lost and sometimes it’s hard to make our voice heard amongst all of the noise surrounding students. What’s the solution? Maybe written information isn’t the only vehicle of choice. We know that students respond brilliantly to visual information. A few of us at Reading have been focusing on exactly that. We’ve started using incredibly simple and entirely free ‘screencapture’ software, like Jing, to record what we’re doing on our screens. We’ve added audio to these short videos and occasionally even webcam footage of our Emma Mayhew1faces. Some of us have even moved beyond PowerPoint and had a huge amount of fun (yes….fun!) with new, massively eye-catching and versatile presentation tools like Prezi (and this is where the floating islands, dolphins and rainbows come in) or Powtoon-and the makers really aren’t overselling their product when they describe it as “awesome”.

 

But will students engage with information delivered in this way? Yes they will and I know this because last Autumn I made a suite of ten 3-5 minute screencasts using Prezi on a whole range of topics-writing a great essay, marking criteria, academic and pastoral help, pre-arrival information and more. They have been viewed over 2,300 times by our students and I’m not even counting my staff training screencasts, one minute module summaries, animated quizzes, video essay feedback and conference paper summaries which bring my views to nearly 4,000 in the last 12 months…and it’s not just me! Cindy Becker and David Nutt have also seen a great response.

We’re so passionate about screencapture that the three of us have just launched the TLDF funded ‘GRASS’ project to support colleagues who would like to try this out for themselves. If you’d like to know more please click on the floating island below to watch our 90 second clip, visit or subscribe to our new website which is full of examples and ‘how to’ videos http://blogs.reading.ac.uk/grass/ , come along and see us all speaking at the CQSD showcase on 19th November at 13:00 but most importantly, book on our first ‘Lunch and Learn’ session via Employee Self Service on Friday 28th November at 13:00 in Palmer 103. We’ll be outlining our experiences and offering training at this event which includes a free buffet lunch and range of our own HOMEMADE CAKES! Goodbye Word and hello exciting, creative possibilities.

Emma Mayhew2

Flipped learning in a team-based situation with a dash of TEL by Dr Cindy Becker

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

This is my new recipe for extending the academic year and helping to welcome our new students. As with any new recipe, some bits of it went really well and some aspects of it were less impressive – and there was one moment when I was in danger of failing to cook up any learning at all.

Along with my colleague Mary Morrissey, I have been working this year to introduce our new module EN1PW: Persuasive Writing. We have been ridiculously excited about the chance to share with our students all that we firmly believe they need to know about how to write practically and persuasively. We have devised a plethora of assessment tasks via blackboard (with help from Anne Crook and our other colleagues in CQSD) but I wanted to go one step further and use technology to enhance the learning experience even before our students reached the lecture hall or seminar room. Aware of the university’s desire to produce a more structured and active Welcome Week for our newcomers inspired me to create a quiz using screencasts, in the hope that students would feel part of our department’s community of learning from the off.

That was my first mistake. Because optional Part 1 modules are allocated to students on Friday of Welcome Week, I was not able to send out the quiz to the relevant students in enough time for them to use it prior to our first meeting. Lesson learned – this recipe would work better for a compulsory module.

Undeterred (I had by that time spent ages on my computer) I gave them the details of the quiz by sending out a document to them on Monday of Week 1, asking them to work through it prior to our first seminar in Week 2. (Richard Steward and I had worked hard to try to make this a bb quiz, but we could not guarantee that the screencasts would play reliably on every device a student might use, so a word document it had to be.)

The quiz consisted of 8 questions, all asking about aspects of writing with which new students struggle each year. The quiz was designed to go further than immediate learning: my idea was to use each question as a springboard to discuss other aspects of writing style. I was also keen to have them work in teams. In the seminar I asked them to get themselves into groups of four – they will remain in these groups for the rest of the term, for a variety of group-based tasks.

I went through the quiz, asking them to recall their individual answers (most had written these down on the sheet) and then decide on a group answer. That was my huge mistake: I just had not thought through in advance how to do this. Should I run through the whole quiz first, asking them to make their group choices, or run through the screencast for each question and then ask for their answers one at a time? I mistakenly chose the former option and ended up realising, too late, that it would have been more effective to have taken the latter approach. This was made more difficult because I had not thought to put the subject of each question on the question sheet, so it would have been easy to get lost had the student beside me not written the topics on her question sheet.

So, things went wrong from time to time, but generally I was pleased with the experience. I found that some of them had shown the quiz to their new flatmates, who I gather were impressed that they had been given a ‘fun’ task before the first seminar. Some of them had called home to discuss the questions. In the seminar it worked really well as a team-building task: they were so busy arguing over possible answers that they forgot to be strangers. I also realised that there were some things I would have assumed they would know which they did not. I am not sure, for example, that I would have found out that some of them were confused by prepositions if we had not been having such a free ranging discussing as a result of the quiz. I think that using animated screencasts really helped in this respect. Seeing a set of cartoons in a seminar set a tone of relaxed, discussion-based learning, which was just what I wanted to achieve.

It was all that I hoped it would be in terms of learning, and with the glitches now fixed on the question sheet I feel more confident about the teaching. I learned more about screencasts using ‘Powtoons’ software too – like the fact that each screencast will publish with a screenshot of exactly what is on the screen at the moment you press the ‘publish’ button. It took some time for me to go back and finesse all of the screencasts in the light of this, and even now I realise that I could have done it better by including an initial title screen. Still, that is the pleasure of teaching, learning and technology: there is always the next thing to learn, the next challenge to face. It is nice to think that I am learning just as hard as they are.

You can find the revised document here: EN1PW introductory quiz(2)

Are you interested in biological recording & monitoring with your students? By Dr Alice Mauchline

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

KS logo small scaleThe University of Reading now has ‘KiteSite’ – a free, bespoke mobile app for biodiversity recording on the Whiteknights campus. KiteSite has been designed as a generic tool to support field training in biodiversity and taxonomy at the University and it can be used in any module for field data collection. There is a supporting website available at:www.reading.ac.uk/herbarium/kitesite

KiteSite was developed in 2014 by a multidisciplinary team of undergraduates and staff with funding from the University’s Teaching and Learning Development Fund. It is available for Android devices from the Play Store and the iOS version is available through the host app EpiCollect. Full instructions on how to download and use the app are available on the project website along with links to online identification guides and ideas of how to use KiteSite to support teaching activities.

Features

IMG_0122 (640x480)KiteSite automatically records time, date and geolocation data; meaning that the first piece of data captured is a photograph of the specimen. The subsequent data headings can be filled in to the level of knowledge known about the organism (Organism group, Common name, Species name). They can be completed with all known information if the recorder has some idea of the identity of the organism or left blank if the organism can’t be identified. A confidence rating is asked for at the end of the data sheet which can be used for confirmation of correct identification. A notes section has also been included to provide a space to record any further information about the sighting.

Two sections of the data form have been customised to allow for groups to add their ‘Project Code’ and for individual recorders to identify themselves with a unique ‘User code’ (e.g. their student number). This allows for easy data extraction from a single teaching excursion and for students to submit their own data for assessment.

Data storage

IMG_0111 (800x600)The data are stored in a central database which is publically available and constantly updated. These data can be used in a multitude of ways to support teaching & learning; for example, they can be analysed to ensure that the students made correct species identifications; time series data can be examined for temporal patterns; spatial data can reveal species movements across campus; phenology data can be examined etc.

As the database grows, these data will become a valuable record of campus biodiversity. The records will supplement the activities of the Whiteknights Biodiversity Blog which collates records of all organisms found living on campus.

Mobile devices available

Several field-ready mobile devices (10 iPad minis and 4 Google Nexus 7s) are available to borrow to support the use of this app in fieldwork teaching. Please get in touch if you would like to borrow these devices or if you’d like to discuss ways to integrate the use of this app and the database in your teaching. I would also be very interested to hear via email (a.l.mauchline@reading.ac.uk), Twitter @UniRdg_KiteSite or via the Whiteknights Biodiversity Blog of your experiences of using KiteSite in teaching & learning activities on campus.

HOT TIP: What is the number one factor behind student success? By Dr Patricia (Paddy) Woodman

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

There are many things that spring to mind as influencing student success, but did you know that research carried out across 21 UK universities (under the auspicious of the HEA, HEFCE, Action on Access and the Paul Hamyln Foundation) determined that the number one factor is that students need to feel a ‘sense of belonging’.

“In place of the received wisdom of the importance to students of choice and flexibility, is the finding that it is a sense of belonging that is critical to both retention and success. It is the human side of higher education that comes first – finding friends, feeling confident and above all, feeling part of your course of study and the institution – that is the necessary starting point for academic success”[1]

From this report and other literature I have distilled the following key points:

  • A sense of belonging is important not only for retention but also for success (i.e. academic attainment)
  • Students who are fully engaged in the life of the university are more successful
  • Both the social sphere and the academic sphere are important for belonging
  • Students primarily expect to feel a sense of belonging and engagement within their subject community
  • Effective learning involves a social dimension
  • Support is most often sought from friends (and family) followed by academic staff
  • Some demographic groups feel less of a sense of belonging than others
  • International students frequently report that integrating into student communities is difficult

When we stop to think about it, if we don’t feel that we belong, feel that we don’t fit in, that we are alone and ‘different’ to others, or even that we have no right to be somewhere, we are hardly likely to thrive – so it is really not surprising that a ‘sense of belonging’ is so important. However what may be more surprising is that at Reading we have a high proportion of students who may be more susceptible to feeling that they are ‘different’ or don’t belong for one reason or another. International students are an obvious example but there are also several other groups such as: disabled students, students from families or communities with little tradition of HE, non-white and non-Christian students, mature students, part-time students students living at home. Together these group constitute in excess of 60% of our UG population. 

So what can we do to actively foster a ‘sense of belonging’?

Things that you might already do but maybe haven’t particularly thought about as fostering belonging

  • Small group teaching, seminars, group work – students engaging with their peers on a common endeavour can bond as a group
  • School/dept social events – subject based societies for example
  • Relationship building between personal tutor and tutees – a sense of belonging can be fostered by developing relationships with staff
  • Transition mentoring/buddying – help new students navigate the university and let them know they are not the only ones adjusting to life at Uni

The findings of the ‘What works?’ research provides some good strong pointers to how we can actively foster this sense of belonging. I can recommend the ‘What Works? Student Retention and Success Project Report (https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/node/2932). It is long, but packed full of excellent initiatives from universities around the country.  

Some general points on the common attributes of effective interventions are that they [2]:

  • are situated in the academic sphere
  • start pre-entry
  • have an emphasis on engagement and an overt academic purpose
  • develop peer networks and friendships
  • create links with academic staff
  • provide key information
  • shape realistic expectations
  • improve academic skills and develop students’ confidence

We can add to this, are:

  • pro-active and developmental
  • Tailored, flexible and relevant

 Specific actions that are known to be effective include:

  • pre-entry engagement – particularly for certain demographic groups
  • Effective induction – engaging all students in both the university community broadly but also the subject community, transition mentoring, activities that allow students to get to know staff as well as their peers. Induction to learning is also part of this, a dialogue about mutual expectations is important to set students off on the right foot.
  • scaffolding the development of academic skills – as opposed to dropping students in the deep end
  • effective personal tutoring – with a focus on developing a coaching relationship (i.e. where students retain responsibility for themselves but personal tutors ask the questions that prompt them to reflect and take action)
  • Peer assisted learning – has tremendous benefits for all involved. It develops deep understanding, independence, confidence, integration etc etc. And it has actually been proven to improve attainment.

and the list goes on …

The observant amongst you will notice that Reading contributed to this influential body of work through a joint project with Oxford Brookes on ‘Comparing and evaluating the impacts on student retention of different approaches to supporting students through study advice and personal development’. Take a look for yourself, but be warned you might find yourself wanting the implement some new initiatives!

This is the first of a series of ‘Hot tips’ postings that aim to bring some insights from recent research right to your screen.

 

[1] HEFCE/Paul Hamyln Foundation ‘What works: Student Retention and Success Report. July 2012

[2] Building Student Engagement and Belonging in Higher Education at a Time of Change: Final Report from the What Works?: Student retention and success programme July 2012 ((https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/node/2932))

 

Paddy Woodman, Director of Student Development and Access

Online peer assessment of group work tools: yes, but which one? By Heike Bruton (a TLDF project)

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

A short while ago I wrote the post “Group work: sure, but what about assessment? This outlines a TLDF- funded project in which Cathy Hughes and I investigated tools for the peer assessment of group work. Cathy and I have now produced a full report, which is available for download here (Cathy Hughes and Heike Bruton TLDF peer assessment report 2014 07 02), and summarised below.

 

Aim and methods

The aim of the project was to evaluate available online systems for the assessment of students’ contribution to group work. In order to establish our criteria for evaluation of these systems, we conducted a series of interviews with academics across the university. This allowed us an understanding of how peer assessment (PA) is used in a range of subjects, and what the different perspectives on the requirements for a computer-based system are.

 

Systems in use and evaluation criteria

Among our eleven interviewees we found five different separate PA systems (including Cathy’s own system) in use by six departments. Notably, Cathy’s tool appeared to be the only entirely computer-based system. Based on the insights gained from the interviews, we developed a set of criteria against which we evaluated available PA systems. These criteria are pedagogy, flexibility, control, ease of use, incorporation of evidence, technical integration and support, and security.

 

Available online systems

We identified three online tools not in use at the university at the moment, which implement PA specifically to the process, not the product, of group work. These three systems are iPeer, SPARKplus and WebPA. In addition we also critically assessed Cathy’s own system, which is already being used in several departments across the university. After investigating PA systems currently in use at Reading and applying the above-named criteria to the four PA system under investigation, we came to a number of conclusions, which resulted in a recommendation.

 

Conclusion

There is a strong sense of commitment among staff to using group work in teaching and learning across the university. PA can serve as a mechanism to recognise hard work by students and also to provide feedback aimed at encouraging students’ to improve their involvement with group work. Whilst any PA system is simply a tool, which can never replace the need for active engagement by academics in their group work projects, such a tool can make PA more effective and manageable, especially for large groups.

 

Recommendation

Our recommendation then is that WebPA should be considered for use within the university. Our research suggests that it could be adopted with relative ease, particularly given the strong and active community surrounding this open-source software.   While it may not be appropriate for everyone, we believe it could be a useful tool to enhance teaching and learning, potentially improving the experience of group work assessment for both staff and students.

Cathy and I will be delivering a number of Teaching and Learning seminars on PA of group work in the near future. To download the full report, click here (Cathy Hughes and Heike Bruton TLDF peer assessment report 2014 07 02). To try out a stand-alone demo version of WebPA, follow this link: http://webpaos.lboro.ac.uk/login.php

Cathy and Heike will be presenting their project in a TEL Showcase event in the spring term. Please check http://www.reading.ac.uk/cqsd/TandLEvents/cqsd-ComingSoon.aspx.

Using screencasts to deliver skills training: a Part One English Literature module

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Dr Nicola Abram, Literature and Languages
n.l.abram@reading.ac.uk

Year of activity: 2014/15

Overview

This entry describes the use of screencasts to deliver skills training on a compulsory Part One English Literature module. As a result of the changes outlined here, every student taking English Literature at the University of Reading will have access throughout their degree to a bank of online resources teaching key skills.

Objectives

  • To train students in the practical skills needed to succeed in an English Literature degree. To induct students into the independent learning required for an English Literature degree.
  • To increase students’ engagement in skills training.
  • To improve students’ understanding of and adherence to academic conventions.
  • To make best use of the contact time (lectures and seminars) on the module.

Context

Over 200 students enter English Literature programmes at the University of Reading each year, from a range of educational backgrounds. To ensure they all have the key skills and theoretical understanding needed to succeed throughout their degrees, we run a compulsory module in Part One , Research & Criticism (EN1RC).

In the previous incarnation of the module, the Autumn Term had been used for a series of 50 minute lectures on research methods, such as ‘Using online sources’, ‘Using published sources’, ‘Citations and referencing’, and ‘Academic writing’. Students also attended a 50 minute seminar each week, the content of which was determined by the seminar tutor. The Spring Term lectures and seminars then inducted students into foundational critical ideas like ‘narrative’, ‘reader’ and ‘author’, as well as issues such as ‘gender and sexuality and ‘race and empire’, via a series of set texts.

I was tasked with convening this module from 2014/15. On my appointment I sought to engage students as more active participants in the skills training component.

Implementation

The process for developing this module began with an informal conversation with another tutor. We identified a disparity between the module content and the mode of delivery: the traditional lecture format did not seem to be the best vehicle for delivering skills training.

Believing that skills training is most effectively conducted through practical and interactive activities, I set about constructing a series of short formative tasks that would enable students to learn by doing. These were designed to break down the process of research and writing into its component parts, so that students could amass the necessary skills bit by bit. Feedback would be given quickly – usually the following week – by their seminar tutor, meaning changes could be implemented prior to attempting a summative (assessed) essay. The specific formative tasks set were: assembling a bibliography, integrating quotation into a short critical commentary, preparing an essay plan, summarising a fiction text, précising a critical text, and drafting an essay introduction.

Students were supported to undertake each task by a screencast: a short (3-5 minute) animation giving the key information about a particular skill and signposting further resources, which students could watch at their own pace and return to at leisure. Screencasts were released to students on a controlled basis via a dedicated area on the module’s Blackboard pages, accompanying the instructions for each formative task. Upon completion of the module, students had therefore engaged with a bank of ten different screencasts. They retain access to this throughout their degrees, via Blackboard.

Most of the screencasts were prepared using the screen capture programme, Camtasia, for which we have multiple departmental licenses. Colleagues who had previously delivered the skills lectures were given the technical support (where necessary) to repurpose that material into a screencast, and others were invited to volunteer new material. A colleague in Study Advice also
contributed a screencast tailored to the needs of English Literature students. This collaborative approach produced a welcome range of different outcomes. Some colleagues used PowerPoint to present written and visual content, while others used Prezi, which better represents the spatial arrangement of the material. Some recorded a voiceover, which provided a welcome sense of connection with an individual tutor, while others chose to use a musical soundtrack downloaded from a royalty-free website such as incompetech. A few colleagues used the animation tools PowToon and VideoScribe, rather than simply recording a presentation onscreen.

A meeting with staff teaching on the module was held at the end of its first term and after its first full year. Their reflections on students’ submitted tasks and classroom engagement proved invaluable for the module’s iterative design.

Impact

As a result of this module, students are evidently more alert to the many components of professional writing and are better equipped to perform good academic practice. Selected comments from qualitative module evaluations affirmed the usefulness of this immersive model of skills training: “The first [formative] tasks such as the bibliography were very useful to bridge the gap into HE”, “All the feedback I received was very helpful and helped me improve my work”, and “The screencasts were also a fantastic idea”.

The screencasts have been watched multiple times by students, suggesting that they are a useful resource that can be returned to and referred to repeatedly. The current most-watched is ‘Incorporating quotations’, which has had 969 views since it was uploaded in January 2015.

Using screencasts as a teaching delivery tool has also provided the opportunity to develop the content of the course. Removing the skills content from lectures freed up contact time to be given to important theoretical material and set texts.

Reflections

The model of interactive skills training harnesses the power of constructive alignment (Biggs, 1996, 1999), where teaching process and assessment method are calculated to maximise students’ engagement with the subject and/or skills being taught. Even for a discursive discipline like English, the QAA Subject Benchmark Statement encourages assessments “aimed at the development
of specific skills (including IT and bibliographical exercises) (2015, p.5).

Although I did not have a particular student demographic in mind when making these changes, the staged development of writing skills seems to offer specific support to international students and EAL learners, who may be unfamiliar with UK academic conventions and benefit from an atomised approach to writing with regular formative feedback. However, all students benefit from this formal induction to academic literacy. Running a core skills module has an equalising effect on the cohort, compensating for disparities in prior educational contexts and attainment.

Embedding the screencasts to view on Blackboard was awkward since it measures dimensions in pixels, and they could not be watched inline by users whose devices did not support a specific plugin. Screencasts were therefore hosted on www.screencast.com, with stable links provided in Blackboard. Both uploading and viewing via the Screencast website are easy and effective, but the cap on bandwidth (2GB per month) meant a need to upgrade to a paid-for subscription (currently £8.36 per month) in months where traffic was particularly high. In future I will consider using YouTube with appropriate privacy settings, to continue the period release of screencasts through link-only access.

Follow up

As at 2016/17, the module continues to run using screencasts as a key teaching method. Additional screencasts have been added to the suite as need arose, for instance to support students’ use of Turnitin as a formative tool, in line with University of Reading strategy. Some screencasts have been replaced as a result of staff turnover. But most remain in use, meaning that the initial work to prepare the content and conduct the screen capture continues to pay off.

Various colleagues in the Department of English Literature have found screencasts to be a useful method for wider skills training. We are now preparing a suite of screencasts to support prospective students and new entrants with the transition into higher education, on topics like ‘What is a lecture?’ and ‘How should I communicate with my tutors?’. We also use screencasts more widely, including as a student assessment method: some of these, along with our public-facing promotional videos, have been given British Sign Language interpretation (contact Dr Cindy Becker for details).

Work is now being undertaken to enhance the training component of the module further through Technology Enhanced Learning, by using Blackboard quizzes to provide students with immediate feedback on their understanding of skills like proper referencing practice.

Links

Example screencasts from ‘Research and Criticism’:

English Literature at the University of Reading YouTube Channel

Coursework redesign for an integrated multidisciplinary module

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Dr Mark Dallas, School of Chemistry, Food and Pharmacy
m.dallas@reading.ac.uk

Overview

9239Within the School of Chemistry, Food and Pharmacy, coursework on a Part Two Pharmacy module, Therapeutics and Medicines Optimisation B (PM2B), was redesigned to reflect the multidisciplinary nature of the new module. In their assessed work, students demonstrated a better appreciation of the interconnectivity of the disciplines of Pharmacy, and students also expressed their enjoyment of the redesigned assessment.

Objectives

  • Redesign coursework to reflect the multidisciplinary nature of PM2B.
  • Implement and assess a learning exercise that allows Pharmacy students to integrate their understanding of different Pharmacy disciplines.

Context

In 2011 the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC), the regulating body for the pharmacy profession within England, Scotland and Wales and the body responsible for accreditation of the Masters of Pharmacy degree course at the University of Reading, adopted a new set of standards for the initial education and training of pharmacists. The first criteria of Standard 5 stressed the need for integrated curricula. With modules within Pharmacy at the University of Reading being altered to reflect these standards, the existing coursework structures were not suited, as they would not have aligned to the joint nature of the new modules.

Implementation

The aims, delivery and assessment of the module’s coursework were completely redesigned. Previously, students had been assessed solely by a written report, and the datasets used only reflected one discipline of pharmacy.

The new coursework that was devised was aligned with a modern day multidisciplinary drug discovery programme, with the intention being that this would allow students to appreciate the integrative nature of pharmacy as a science, and the multidisciplinary nature of their subject.

There were four assessed components that comprised the module’s coursework. A project report contributed 50% of the coursework final mark; a poster presentation 20%; reflective diaries 15%; and engagement 15%. By having multiple types of assessment it was hoped that students would engage with the topics, and that it would promote deep learning, while allowing students an opportunity to demonstrate a variety of skill sets. The poster presentation and project reports saw students assessed as groups. To assess engagement, a rubric was created, rating students on their academic engagement and their group engagement based on clearly defined criteria.

Impact

The redesigned assessment was enjoyed by students, and in their assessed work students consistently demonstrated a sufficient understanding of the interconnectivity of the disciplines of Pharmacy. Marks on the written report, however, were lower than had been hoped, and suggested that some adjustment to this aspect of assessment were necessary.

Reflection

Having the coursework comprise different assessment types was valuable as it allowed staff to gain an insight into student knowledge retention, critical thinking, and their ability to work in a wider context.

The written report represented an assessment format with which students would be familiar, given the format of assessments at Part One. The value of having students produce a written report was that it allowed students to be tested on their application, rather than simple obtainment, of knowledge to address a problem.

Having students produce a poster presentation as part of their assessment on the module encouraged students to utilise different skills in their work. Communication skills, which had previously not been assessed in the module, but are an important skill that the University of Reading seeks to develop in its graduates, became a central element of assessment. By having to produce a poster that would then be presented to their peers, students were encouraged to engage deeply with the topic, and to take pride in what they created, and created an opportunity for peer learning.

Having group work as an assessed element was of great value in a multidisciplinary module. With group members having different strengths within the group, they are able to make a valuable contribution, and benefit from learning from others’ strengths in turn. While group work does introduce the possibility for ‘free-riding’, whereby students do not engage and instead rely on the rest of the group to deliver a good final mark, and this was something that students commented on in their feedback, the strength of group assessment is the key communication and collaborative skills it demands.

The creation of reflective diaries is especially pertinent to students in healthcare professions, as reflective writing is a central element of their continuing professional development. An additional and unforeseen benefit of this assessment was the insight it provided into students’ thought processes, which was valuable for making adjustments to the module.

Assessing student engagement was one of the challenging aspects of the redesigned assessment. Having a clear rubric made marking a more objective process.

Follow up

To address the issues that were introduced by having group work assessed, a session on group dynamics has been introduced to the module in order to better set expectations. The skills addressed in this session will be valuable to students not only in this module, but can also be applied across their academic and professional experience.

A further innovation has been the use of online project management tools. This has both allowed students to better manage their work and engagement, and also allows assessors access to evidence to help with marking, and allows group work to be better monitored.

Croissants and Coffee: Engaging students and building a sense of community in the Department of Politics by Emma Mayhew

By edwardwhite Comment Closed

Last year I wrote all about the pedagogical value of cake in my seminars. This year I want to extend this notion and talk about the value of croissants and coffee as a means to encourage student engagement and develop further a sense of community in the department.

I knew from my experience with cake breaks that most students have a view on all aspects of their university experience-how their degree programme works, module choice, content, assessment, feedback, teaching and resources. I wanted to find more ways to get to these views because I wanted to understand the student experience more deeply from part 1 all the way through to the postgraduate level.

Politics Breakfast JanuarySo, together with part 3 student Florian Marcus, I decided to run a series of ‘breakfast liaison clubs’ within the department. Of course they weren’t really ‘breakfast’ clubs- they started at either ten or eleven in the morning- but we did provide free croissants, Danish pastries and orange juice. Because this was a joint staff-student initiative focused on finding out what students thought and engaging them in curriculum design, we were able to attract funding from the CQSD/RUSU Partnerships in Learning and Teaching Projects Scheme (PLanT).

We quickly learnt a number of key lessons-mini chocolate croissants are far more popular than plain croissants or jam Danish pastries but more importantly than that, even when you provide free food and drink not all students will turn up and those that do are typically highly engaged, high achieving and satisfied with their programme anyway.

The students who came did give us some great feedback that we could work with, mainly on contact hours, the nature and amount of assessment, e-submission and assignment feedback. These students did report that breakfast clubs were a great opportunity to talk to lecturers in a more informal setting, to get more advice on dissertations, on postgraduate studies and future careers. Florian and I were able to report all of our experiences at the first RUSU sponsored Partnership in Teaching and Learning Conference in March while Florian took the lead presenting at a PLanT T&L showcase in June.

Great, we thought, but there was something else that we needed to reflect on. We had identified early in the project design process that a useful offshoot might be that these kinds of events would be feeding into a sense of community within the department but actually, what was initially an accidental consequence, grew in importance as we moved through the project. By the end the importance of community building became as, if not more important than the idea of listening to students and engaging them in curriculum design. So as a result of this project we started to think about more natural, organic community building and the benefits that a stronger sense of community brings to all students, particularly those who need stronger support systems around them.

We had a few ideas on this but the introduction of Enhancement Week gave us the space in the academic calendar to actually do something. We’re delighted that we have been able to fully fund a number of trips next year to Parliament, the National Portrait Gallery and to the Imperial War Museum. In addition our new Part 1 students will enjoy six hours of team-building events, three of which will be run by a former military figure in the grounds surrounding HUMSS. And we’ve had lots more ideas. These, together with the continuation of our now famous seminar cake breaks, should all feed into an environment of student engagement and an even greater sense of supportive community within the department in the new academic year.