Cohort Feedback Case Study

School / department: School of Animal, Rural and Environmental Sciences

Programme: BSc Geography (Physical)

Modules: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms; Geographical Fieldwork (UK and Overseas); Introduction to Geology; Glaciology and Glacial Geomorphology and Environmental Change

Level of study: Level one – Level three

Activity: Cohort feedback and feed-forward through email, text documents on NOW and tutorial sessions

Aims:

• streamline the assessment process
• provide students with a variety of feedback and feed-forward
• afford students the opportunity to consider the relative development of their work compared with their peers.

The following example has been ongoing practice for approximately two years.

Contact: Nick Midgley

Case Study
From the first assignment at Level 1 through to the end of Level 3, students studying on the BSc Geography (Physical) receive cohort feed-forward for all submitted assignments in the following modules: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms; Geographical Fieldwork (UK and Overseas); Introduction to Geology; Glaciology and Glacial Geomorphology, and Environmental Change.

Cohort feed-forward outlines common errors or limitations found in the submitted assignments and is provided in addition to individual feedback. It provides students with guidance and suggested actions for future assignments.
Feed-forward was introduced in 2009 in response to student comments on an introductory module that the feedback they received was not very helpful. The tutor developed the method of feed-forward to try and ensure a more productive process that students would engage with. It was also felt that this work might support ongoing wider efforts to increase retention.
Below is an outline of the current feedback and feed-forward elements provided on the modules listed above:

• Email: Students receive an email to advise them that their marked assignments are ready to collect. The email outlines common errors specific to the task which students can consider alongside their assignments and individual feedback, e.g. common calculation errors. The email invites students to look at the cohort feed-forward comments which relate to the assignment (accessible via the module area on NOW).
• Online feed-forward comments: Feed-forward is provided electronically in NOW as it was felt that that this would increase student engagement. This has the additional benefit of enabling staff to track which students look at the feed-forward and for how long. This tracking is complicated by the fact that the time that the document is open does not equate to reading, as it may be downloaded quickly or left open while another task is undertaken.By way of an example, feed-forward for the Fieldwork Portfolio assignment included a three-page document with six learning points, namely: citing literature, researching information, academic writing and writing structure, use of figures and tables and field notebooks. At the end of the document was a reflection and action plan for students to review their own work in relation to the feed-forward comments.
• There is no variation in the format or organisation of feed-forward at different levels of study. The tutor has developed a comment bank to provide feedback more efficiently as mistakes are often of a similar nature and are common to all levels of study, e.g., misuse of references, miscalculations and spelling.
• Individual comments: Students also receive individual feedback and feed-forward on submitted assignments, in addition to the cohort feedback. Students are given individual comments, e.g., where students need to incorporate more relevant references. The tutor may have underlined sections of the text and commented on them.

One further approach, in-person cohort and peer feedback/forward, is currently being piloted for the Fieldwork Portfolio assignment on the module Geographical Fieldwork (UK and Overseas). This is in response to a only a very small percentage of the students on this module viewing the feed-forward online comments. The tutor has observed over time that the number of students viewing online comments typically decreases with each successive assignment. This may be due to the fact that the given feed-forward comments are similar regardless of the assignment.

• In-person cohort and peer feedback/forward: The tutor is currently piloting a system of verbal in-person cohort feedback in tutorials as an accompaniment to the available online text.
• At a recent tutorial students were introduced to the idea of 360˚ feedback and students discussed where and from whom they could obtain feedback/feed-forward. The types of feedback which students identified were feedback from lecturing staff, self-generated reflective feedback and feedback from their peers. Peer review activities are planned for future tutorials, wherein students will consider their own and possibly their peers’ work in relation to the cohort feed-forward comments. It is hoped that the mixture of methods will allow those students who have not yet accessed online cohort feed-forward to consider the comments and also allow all students to consider the relevance of the comments to their own work and what this might mean in terms of planning their future learning.

Benefits to staff
Streamlined feedback/feed-forward process, increased marking speed.

Benefits to students
Greater volume and variety of feedback, opportunity to compare own development strengths and weaknesses with peers.

Feedback
Some students have voiced a dislike of cohort feedback, objecting to its intellectual challenge and the fact that it involves more work for the student. The value of cohort feedback is, and can only be realised through interpretation by the students themselves. In this sense, cohort feedback and feed-forward represents a cultural change in terms of the approach students take to their studies as a whole. Those students who have received cohort feedback positively have commented that they are satisfied with the volume of feedback offered by having two different methods (individual and cohort). They also comment that cohort feedback is useful as it allows them to view their development in relation to their peers, i.e. it allows them to see the mistakes they are making and avoiding compared to their peers; in this way they can get a sense of the level of their overall learning and writing skills.

Considerations
The size, cultural context and nature of the course can affect the success of the cohort feedback method. In this case the cohort of students is small, c.20, and therefore close-knit. A culture of collaborative study exists with students permitted to work together at the data collection stages of assignments. This is partly due to the fact that the equipment which students use generally needs two people to utilise it, e.g. topographic survey equipment. As such, the course is relatively well-situated to introduce in-person group reflection on cohort feed-forward comments and also the peer review methods which are about to be piloted.

On balance the introduction of this type of cohort feedback has streamlined the assessment process effectively but appears not to have affected the quality of student work which has neither notably improved nor worsened on the various modules. Future work will focus on increasing engagement with the feedback and reflection on how to make cohort feedback and feed-forward more meaningful.

There may be a divergence between student and tutor expectations of feedback or feed-forward. Students request good quality feedback; however, it is the perception of the tutor that the main feedback that the students want is to find out their mark. Feedback received by students at GCSE and A level stages is likely for the most part to have been formative. It will have consisted of guidance for students to improve a piece of work-in-progress which they will then have the option to re-submit. Feed-forward in contrast gives key points for students to consider for future assignments and an action plan, e.g. students may be advised to consult reference guidelines. This type of feed-forward although formative informs future work rather than work-in-progress. Although more meaningful than summative retrospective feedback, feed-forward may therefore still fall short of students’ expectations, especially students at earlier levels of study. Preparation is key to ensuring engagement and effectiveness.

All students receive an assessment pack for each assignment, which is developed further each year in light of changing practice and of tutor reflection on common student errors and knowledge gaps. Many of the common errors outlined in feed-forward comments such as miscalculations and misuse of references are dealt with in advance of the assignments themselves through the assessment packs. This suggests that students have not fully engaged with these packs. The tutor is considering how to promote better student engagement in order to encourage a higher standard of work and a holistic approach to assessment and feedback.

Further information: Dr Nick Midgley, Programme Leader for BSc Geography (Physical) Module Leader for Earth Surface Processes and Landforms; Geographical Fieldwork (UK and Overseas); Introduction to Geology; Glaciology and Glacial Geomorphology; and Environmental Change

Related documents: Some slides on 360 degree feedback are available for download. These are used as a tool for students on the Physical Geography programme to discuss the purposes and types of feedback with a view to encouraging an intrinsic feedback culture. Attach doc 360 degree feedback as a download.