1 / 11

Dr Lindsey Ferrie, Simon Cotterill Michael Thirlwell and Emma Curry

School of Biomedical Sciences. Encouraging students and staff to hear each others views in the feedback fog to support learning on both sides!. Dr Lindsey Ferrie, Simon Cotterill Michael Thirlwell and Emma Curry. LTMS Learning Technologies for Medical Sciences. Why was the project needed?.

yetta
Download Presentation

Dr Lindsey Ferrie, Simon Cotterill Michael Thirlwell and Emma Curry

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. School ofBiomedical Sciences Encouraging students and staff to hear each others views in the feedback fog to support learning on both sides! Dr Lindsey Ferrie, Simon Cotterill Michael Thirlwell and Emma Curry LTMS Learning Technologies for Medical Sciences

  2. Why was the project needed? • Despite consistently high (+95%) NSS overall satisfaction, feedback satisfaction is lower ~75% • Students express uncertainty in how to feed forward in non subject-specific content • Staff disengagement with feedback as a result of time limitations and student use.

  3. The Feedback Foghorn Less is more! A simpler approach offers greater support

  4. What the project did. • Collected staff and student opinions on feedback. • Supported a student designed add on to existing ePortfolio services which focuses on feedback. • Trialled use of the “Feedback Foghorn” with Biomedical Science undergraduates. • Currently integrating reflective feedback practices using the “Foghorn” in all degree programmes.

  5. Who was involved • Student interns • Michael Thirlwell and Emma Curry • Newcastle Work Experience scheme (Careers service) £600 for 100 hours support • Internet Developers • James Outterside and David Teasdale • Learning Technologies for Medical Sciences (LTMS) • Students and staff • SBMS and Psychology

  6. Student design ‘Intermediate-2’ design Michael Emma Mock-ups

  7. Development (LTMS) James David Simon

  8. Going Forward • Piloting • Sustainability / Scalability • Admin tools • Standardised upload/integration processes • Assignment slots by module / academic year • Feedback (Grade Centre, Essay feedback etc.)

  9. Outcomes • Surveys • Students (n = 72), Staff (n = 35) Differences: • Frequency of discussing feedback with staff vs friends • 76% students say never/once versus 40% reported by staff • Agreement that often students forget suggestions for improvement for the next piece of work. • 43% students agree versus 66% staff Similarities: • Marking criteria misunderstanding • Critical thinking and Integration of material highest ranked by both staff and students. • Storing/using student feedback in one place • BUT 90% students want this versus 69% staff • Focus Groups • Students (n = 15) • Marking criteria needs clarification and opportunity to talk to individuals

  10. Outcomes • Foghorn design/style • 105 undergraduate students • Key word analysis – 74% positive response to design #4 • User survey • 12 SBMS students • 75% agreed it would be useful for learning and applying feedback.

  11. Advice • Timing of student surveys • Impact of different data systems • Incentives budget! • Make use of student interns and NWE Thanks

More Related