We have introduced a real-time polling system to support student engagement and feedback in four large Level 1 and 2 modules in Biological Sciences. The audience response system makes use of a technology that is ubiquitous and familiar to the students. To participate, students send text messages using their mobile phones or send a message via their smartphone, and poll results are immediately displayed within a Powerpoint presentation during the lecture. In this case study, student evaluations indicate that mobile polling has been very well received and been of real value to students in helping them to gain increased awareness of their strengths and weaknesses. Students also report increased engagement during lectures that has provided an additional incentive to attend classes. Importantly, this innovative approach has the potential to be widely disseminated with minimal training and technological requirements.

National Student Survey (NSS) results show that many students are dissatisfied with the amount and quality of feedback they get for their work. This study reports on two case studies in which we tried to address these issues by introducing audio feedback to one undergraduate (UG) and one postgraduate (PG) class, respectively. In case study one audio feedback was given to half of the UG class whereas the other half received written feedback for a low stake (10%) exam style essay. In case study two audio feedback only was given to the PG class for a purely formative assignment which formed the basis for a final, summative piece of work. In both studies, audio feedback was received favourably as students found it clear, detailed and personal. A comparison between audio and written feedback (case study one) indicated that audio feedback left students more satisfied and provided more explanatory as well as motivational comments than written feedback. Generating audio feedback proved to be significantly more time consuming (by five minutes per script) than written feedback, but was more efficient in the sense that it produced nearly 10 times as much and higher quality feedback per unit of time. However, neither form of feedback led to an increase in students' subsequent performance in a final, summative exam essay. We conclude that audio feedback is better feedback in terms of student experience but it is still unclear if audio feedback can lead to higher attainment than other forms of feedback.

Feedback can be an important element of learning, but only if students engage with it. Students are only likely to engage with feedback that they find useful. This study aimed to identify characteristics of written feedback perceived by students as effective. We used a mixed‐method approach, integrating quantitative and qualitative data that were collected through the analysis of feedback that was identified by students as good, a student questionnaire, as well as interviews and a focus group exploring students’ views on what good feedback looks like. Although the results show that length and composition of ‘good’ feedback can be extremely variable, some common characteristics could be identified, leading to a set of recommendations for staff marking written assessments. According to students, good feedback should be detailed and specific, and it should tell students how they can improve. Students also find it important that feedback is honest and constructive. In addition, positive reinforcement was identified as important by the focus group, although few examples of good written feedback on the assignment contained any direct praise. Surprisingly, feedforward which might help students in other modules did not feature highly in students’ perceptions of good feedback, possibly indicating a focus by students on improving the current assignment rather than on future assignments.

The aim of this action research project was to improve student learning by encouraging more ''time on task'' and to improve self-assessment and feedback through the introduction of weekly online tests in a Year 2 lecture module in biological sciences. Initially voluntary online tests were offered to students and those who participated achieved higher exam marks than those who did not, but completion rate was low. Making the tests compulsory led to high completion rates, but class performance decreased, indicating that using the same assessment for formative and for summative purposes is not always beneficial for learning. Finally, these problems were resolved by introducing a two-stage approach: the first stage of each test was formative and provided prompt feedback. However, students had to achieve 80% to progress to the second summative stage of the test. The two-stage online tests led to significantly improved class performance. This novel test design ensures that students go through at least two attempts and therefore fully benefit from the learning opportunities presented by the formative stage. Two-stage online tests present the opportunity to provide regular feedback in large classes and to improve performance not only of good but also of ''weak'' students.

No abstract