1 / 20

Technology to support the transition from paper based to electronic modes of feedback and assessment

Technology to support the transition from paper based to electronic modes of feedback and assessment. Mark Dransfield , Technology Enhanced Learning Advisor & University Teaching Fellow Nikki Swift, Senior Teaching Fellow, York St John Business School.

takara
Download Presentation

Technology to support the transition from paper based to electronic modes of feedback and assessment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Technology to support the transition from paper based to electronic modes of feedback and assessment Mark Dransfield, Technology Enhanced Learning Advisor & University Teaching Fellow Nikki Swift, Senior Teaching Fellow, York St John Business School

  2. Background of e-marking and feedback in the University • 2007/8 Pilot projects (video feedback link) • 2008 e-submission working group • 2009: University Quality of the Student Experience (QSEC) committee decided to implement e-submission across the university from 2010/11 • 2010: The Dean of the Business School decides to implement e-feedback across the Business School • 2010: STEF project funding granted through L&TD

  3. Wanted to find a range of methods for people to mark electronically which they were personally comfortable with

  4. Initial aims of the STEF project • To embed e-marking and feedback in the Business School • To gain an understanding of the impact of new technologies on e-marking and feedback • To inform the University of the most efficient and practical ways of working with these technologies, potentially avoiding investing in unworkable/impractical technologies • To share knowledge with the University and the sector of attitudes to marking on screen

  5. Equipment used • iPads • Digital Pen & Lightweight laptop • Macbook Air • Kindle • Dual Monitors • TurnitinUK & Grademark

  6. iPad demo

  7. iPads • Positive reports: • Useful to be able to access your marking anywhere, e.g. on the train • Very useful for meetings and email • Negative reports: • iTunes not available on networked PCs • People experienced problems during initial setup with personal iTunes account (not so much a problem with iOS5) • Complex process of getting assignments on to the ipad and back to Moodle • Complex administrative process of purchasing ‘apps’ – ‘gifting’ • Poor quality annotations/fiddly to do • Didn’t replicate marking on paper closely enough • Some people didn’t complete the project as desired

  8. 1 Digital pen & lightweight laptop • Link to YouTube video • Feedback from user

  9. 1 MacbookAir • Most powerful and light • First ultrabook style on the market • Shift of operating system (YSJ a ‘Microsoft House’)

  10. Kindle • Some information from Keith

  11. Dual monitors • Some findings from dual monitors – explored further in practical stuff • Findings from the project led on to most of the faculty being equipped with DMs • Negatives of being fixed to a location (work!)

  12. TurnitinUK & Grademark

  13. Drawbacks observed in the early stages of the project • The steps required to secure student work during the download/upload of annotated scripts to Moodle are time consuming and can add a lot of time to the assessment process • On screen marking using PCs is reported to be very slow. We considered whether this could be due to: • Reading/scanning/reviewing small section of text at once • Being a new method of working which may speed up with experience

  14. Benefits observed in the early stages of the project • Hardware purchases were reported to improve staff efficiency in other areas (time management, email access on the go etc.) • Ease of access to documents • Materials are accessible by External Examiners

  15. Second Phase – Year 2 • 11 ipad users • 2 Asus tablet users

  16. Mentoring • ‘Buddies’ • Length of project restrictive – 3 semesters • Staff reluctant to ask for assistance • Basic use is reasonably intuitive • Staff workloads/time constraints meant • Unofficial support system?

  17. Impact of the project • Year 1 29% involved in the project • Year 2 44% directly involved in the project, but all having benefitted from dual screens

  18. Emerging Aims of the project • To consider the impact of working with mobile technologies on data security • To consider the impact of e-marking and feedback on student perceptions of feedback • To consider the impact of e-marking and feedback on staff time and feedback turnaround times

  19. Findings • Mismatch between expectations and what the technology is capable of • Time is a major issue for almost everyone involved in the project • No one size fits all solution, people have to find their own preferred methods • Attitudes are mixed, some love it and some hate it (new staff are more accepting generally)

  20. The Future • Opinions are not uniform – some staff have welcomed e-marking • Opinions are divided over different devices • Upload to VLE is being supported by admin staff • New devices coming soon with different/improved stylus technology, e.g. Galaxy Note 10.1

More Related