Engaging students with feedback through adaptive release

Abstract

Feedback to students has been highlighted in the literature as an area where improvements are needed. Students need high quality, prompt feedback, but they also need guidance and tools to help them engage with and learn from that feedback. This case study explores staff and student perceptions of a tool at Sheffield Hallam University which releases electronic feedback to students before allowing them to access their grades. This approach was designed to encourage feedback engagement and connection with future assessments. The methods employed were student interviews and staff questionnaires about their experiences. The data were analysed to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach, create recommendations for institutions looking to improve feedback engagement and identify areas for further development.

Improving the effectiveness of feedback by use of assessed reflections and withholding of grades

“…It's possible that some students focus more on the positive comments than those which are perceived as negative, or believe, for example, that if a substantial degree of effort put into the work has been recognised by the marker, that this must automatically equate to a high grade. Nevertheless, a slight majority were in favour of withholding the grade, and their comments indicated that grade withholding encouraged them to analyse the feedback more carefully, in line with the findings of others (Irwin et al, 2013). …”

“…The changes in our approaches to implementing the reflections in 2013-14, and increased emphasis on generation of active action plans, may have facilitated the acquisition of the requisite skills in effective use of feedback in a proportion of the class for whom feedback may otherwise have had little positive effect. It is evident from our own experience that not all students immediately grasp the concept of reflecting on feedback, as has also been reported by Irwin et al (2013). The step of reviewing student reflections as an integral part of the overall process is clearly important in order to provide guidance in relation to the reflection and the action plans that are generated.…”

“…Since provision of grades, with or without comments, may be less conducive to improving performance than provision of comments alone (Butler 1988;Black and Wiliam 1998), we trialled the format of initially providing feedback alone to students; and only later releasing the grade, in line with the suggestions of Taras (2002), Gibbs and Simpson (2004), Boud and Falchikov (2006), Irons (2008), Irwin et al (2013) and others. Student response to this exercise was mixed, with 43% against withholding of grades.…”

“…Both approaches were effective, however these one-off interventions required significant amounts of time and effort from both students and staff. Completion of an online reflection prior to grade release facilitated real reflection in some students but a purely token response in others (Irwin et al 2013). We introduced a series of written reflections on feedback for coursework submitted during the early stages of our MSc programme, the time at which many postgraduates, particularly international students, require to make substantial adjustments in approaches to learning and assessment.…”

Student access of online feedback is modified by the availability of assessment marks, gender and academic performance

“…However, this design could have unintended negative consequences for student access to feedback in LMS, especially if students are primarily focused on obtaining their assessment scores (eg, Nesbit & Burton, ; Winter & Dye, ) or alternatively, if they exhibit strong emotional responses to marks that might influence their motivation to view feedback (Carless, ). To encourage engagement with feedback and reduce the focus on marks, some researchers advocate for a “feedback first, marks second” approach and have developed software that releases feedback files prior to marks in LMS (“adaptive release,” Irwin, Hepplestone, Holden, Parkin, & Thorpe, ; Parkin et al , ). In contrast, when students are required to open a separate feedback file after receiving their marks, this could be interpreted as a “marks first, feedback second” approach.…”