by Sandra Lalli
“Action without feedback is completely unproductive for the learner” (Handley, Millar & Price, 2011, p. 879)
Discourse on feedback consistently suggests that students are disengaged from course material as a result of weak and insufficient feedback mechanisms. When feedback is provided to students by teaching assistants (TA) and professors collectively, it is commonly unclear, not detailed, and rarely provided in a timely manner. Traditionally, feedback is provided taking a summative approach, where students’ achievements are summarized at the end of a term through a final grade. This is a rather passive approach which does not allow a TA to have an impact on student engagement with the course material while the term is progressing. As such, a new perspective has been adopted which focuses on the incorporation of formative feedback processes, where students are provided with ongoing clarification and reassurance which enhances their motivation as well as stimulates a higher level of engagement with the learning opportunities that university level courses and associated course materials have to offer.
Given that students have no control over the feedback methods they receive, it is the duty of the TAs to employ robust formative feedback processes which encourage student engagement. It is suggested, therefore, that as a TA you follow Beaumont, O’Doherty, and Shannon’s Dialogic Feedback Cycle; a best-practice which promotes continuous dialogue within a cyclical, phased assessment framework. The Cycle is presented next, along with the specific feedback mechanisms which are expected to encourage student engagement.
Preparatory Guidance – Phase I
This phase requires TAs discuss in tutorial sessions the marking schemes and grading criteria for each assignment. It is in the best interest of TAs to use model answers from previous years to guide students.
In-Task Guidance – Phase II
This phase requires that TAs provide continuous and consistent formative assessment opportunities for students to engage with and discuss the schemes and criteria from Phase I.
Performance Feedback – Phase III
This phase requires that TAs provide students with formal written and verbal feedback on specific assignments. Of the course the feedback provided must be consistent with the schemes and criteria from Phase I.
So what feedback mechanisms are available to TAs? Although it is expected that traditional mechanisms such as summative grades, email, and office hours continue to be used, TAs can take the feedback process one step further to include the following four formative methods. Notably, TAs can make the most use of these feedback mechanisms in Phase II and as such, can have the most impact on student engagement in this phase as well.
- Break large assignments into smaller, more manageable pieces. Not only does this ensure students are engaged with the course material more systematically throughout the term, it provides an opportunity for students to come to you more often for reassurance that they are on the right track. Effectively, more consistent and structured guidance only makes students want to do their work more.
- Engage students in peer review and peer marking. This can be done during tutorial sessions or through technologically supported online dialogues (i.e., blogs, Carleton’s WebCT, etc.). The focus of this method is to provide students with the opportunity to share draft deliverables and receive peer reviewed comments from each other. The result is high-level discussion and interaction among students which raises their awareness of quality work and thereby engages them more deeply with course material to achieve a higher standard.
- Provide verbal feedback on coursework in an individual meeting. Research suggests that personalized, one-on-one feedback from TAs is most valued by students because it makes them, along with the effort they put into the assignment, feel acknowledged. Additionally, the relational dimension of this process where students can respond to feedback enables trust and confidence to be built between the student and their TA. Verbal feedback can also include devoting a certain amount of time during tutorial sessions for structured feedback which pertains to the entire group of students.
- Provide in-depth written feedback. Personal experience (as a student and a TA) suggests that TAs often neglect to provide quality written feedback because they are unilaterally focused on applying the specific schemes and criteria to produce an overall grade. However, it is important that TAs veer away from this mentality and provide formal written feedback (i.e., how calculations should be done, where arguments went off course, grammatical errors, etc.) to identify areas of improvement for subsequent assignments.
Following the structured and strategic approach to feedback inherent to the Dialogic Feedback Cycle has significant power and impact on student engagement because it makes students mindful of their next assignment and the application of current feedback to it. The phased-approach to feedback motivates students to engage with courses and course material going-forward because they are consistently reassured and motivated by corrective action that can be acted on in subsequent course deliverables. When TAs provide timely, pertinent and clear feedback through the mechanisms identified above, students go from thinking “TAs just want to grade this quickly to get it over with” to a point where students feel acknowledged and take pride in the subsequent work they submit to show improvements have been made. Ultimately, this will lead to better quality learning and higher grades for students.
Bibliography
Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising Assessment Feedback: A Key to Improving Student Learning? . Studies in Higher Education 36(6), 671-687.
Brown, J. (2007). Feedback: The Student Perspective. Research in Post-Compulsory Education 12(1), 33-51.
Handley, K., Millar, J., & Price, M. (2011). Feedback: Focusing Attention on Engagement. Studies in Higher Education 36(8), 879-896.
Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin, H., & Thorpe, L. (2011). A Role for Technology in Enhancing Students’ Engagement with Feedback. Assessment & Education in Higher Education, 1- 11.