Chapter 6: Students’ experiences of the participative assessment process 6.1 Introduction
6.5 Students’ experiences of being involved in the feedback process
108
receive, as well as their understandings of the contribution feedback can make to their learning.
109
properly” (ibid.). Students also observed that the degree to which they benefited from peer assessment related to the extent to which peers shared a common understanding of the assessment criteria and the task requirements. S08’s response was illustrative of a shared concern that: “The challenge is what if your peer has interpreted the question wrong? What kind of feedback is that person going to give you?” (668-669). In this respect students gained valuable insights into the need to practice discernment in how they responded to feedback and how this related to their abilities to assess themselves (see Boud and Tyree, 1995 in 4.2.6).
It was notable that students who experienced the process more positively expressed similar concerns, but interpreted them differently. For these students, the peer feedback interaction provided a valuable opportunity for discussion about the task, the assessment criteria and each other’s performance. For them, the process of negotiating differences was an important part of the learning process. This view was expressed by S01 who argued that “the peer assessment process injected a very nice dynamic into the group learning process” (965-970) and that the process of “getting clarity about a partner’s interpretation of the assessment task and the criteria contributed to my learning” (ibid.). S04 shared a similar view and emphasised the value of face-to-face interactions:
What I found particularly useful was the fact that when my assessment partner and I disagreed on a point we had the opportunity to discuss it immediately.
That process of asking someone to justify his or her position also contributed to learning (980-986).
In recognising the socially constructed of knowledge these students provide evidence to support Baldwin’s (2000) contention (see 4.2.2) that self-assessment and learning can only occur within a broader social environment.
However, despite the students’ different experiences, the class shared a common appreciation of the amount of feedback received during the process and were unanimous in their acknowledgement that this had contributed to their learning (see 4.2.6). In this respect S12’s comments were representative:
I think for me it was just the amount of feedback. It was quite a new thing to have three different people’s perspectives on your work. You know, usually you just get one sentence at the bottom of your essay … and also to be able to ask so many questions about your work and have them [all the assessors] give their opinions and .. ja, that was very interesting (177 – 181).
Students appreciated the fact that the lecturer was also involved in the process and that final results were not exclusively contingent on their own self-assessments and the opinions
110
expressed by their peers. Students described the lecturer’s feedback as ‘“careful and thorough’ and acknowledged [he] had spent a lot of time providing valuable feedback” (FN:
1572-1578).
What was particularly significant about this finding was the degree to which the process succeeded in enabling students to recognise the value of feedback and how this encouraged them to engage deeply with the process. In referring to their undergraduate studies, many students confirmed Gibbs and Simpson’s (2004-05) observation that feedback is often ignored. In contrast, most of the students acknowledged that their approach to feedback had changed dramatically through involvement in the participative process. Rather than ignoring feedback, many students argued that they either wanted more feedback or that they had actively sought out additional feedback during the module. Particularly illustrative of this finding was one student’s description of how he had responded to feedback from the lecturer.
I remember reading over the tutor’s comments and taking a pencil and scribbling furiously and I was venting in my own mind, I did not put that theory in for a reason or something like that, but then I had to read it a couple of times and go back see what marks had come in and I think it was interesting (S06: 722-729).
Students were unanimous in their view that the peer feedback component of the process should be extended to include additional feedback from other peers. This was particularly important for those who expressed a lack of confidence in their partner’s ability to provide feedback that was meaningful to them. These students shared the view that:
[S]tudents will not necessarily agree with everything [said by their peers] and that not all of the feedback received will be helpful. We need to decide for ourselves what we want to take on board or not, but it would help if we were not reliant on the feedback from one peer. I think the process should rather be expanded to include more people giving feedback to each other (S13: 1126- 1137).
Similarly, S02 argued that: “if two other people are concurring on a particular point it can make you … start thinking and to see what they are saying critically” (2464-2467). Notably, several of the students felt that this expansion of the feedback pool did not need to be formalised, but rather that students should be encouraged to seek out the views of others if they felt they needed additional feedback. Indeed, as was discussed in the previous sub- section on assessment communities, several of the students found the process encouraged them to identify others outside the formal process to provide additional feedback on their work. The participative process not only encouraged students to take steps that would
111
enhance their performance in completing the task at hand, but it also introduced them to an important skill that will be of benefit to them throughout their professional and learning careers – the ability to identify and seek out relevant feedback from others when necessary (see 4.2.6). As S04 noted: “I did not feel I had to restrict myself to my assigned assessment partner … the process encouraged me to seek out feedback from other students in the class”
(980-986). Several students also recognised that ongoing feedback could make a significant contribution to the writing process that involves multiple rounds of drafting and reworking before completing the final product.
A further valuable finding relating to the involvement of students in the peer feedback process was the fact that, while the majority found the feedback from peers valuable, all of them valued the experience of giving feedback to peers. Students acknowledged the degree of responsibility required in providing such feedback and how, by focusing on someone else’s work, they had been encouraged to reflect more critically on their own performance.
[Y]ou need to take responsibility for another person’s learning [so]… you really say, ‘Okay, I’m responsible for this person’s learning, I have to give them feedback’ and in doing so, you are also enriching yourself (S16: 2121- 2134).
These experiences confirm findings reported by Liu and Carless (2006) and Fallows and Chandramohan (2001) which addresses how giving feedback enhances learning (see 4.2.6).
Students also felt the process of giving feedback provided an authentic platform on which to develop skills of relevance to their future professional development. They observed that in their anticipated roles as future media leaders they will be required to provide feedback to colleagues and subordinates. In this respect S13 observed that he had learned “to be sensitive to the needs of different people and also to use the [feedback] process in order to encourage others” (908-910) and furthermore that “different people will respond to feedback in different ways” (914-917). In this way the involvement of students through participative assessment further enhanced the authentic nature of the process and provided further opportunities for students to apply their skills, knowledge and judgment (see Bowden and Marton, 1998 in 4.1.3.B).
A further important finding relating to students’ experiences of being involved in the feedback related to their growing understanding of how knowledge is constructed and the degree to which feedback received might represent only one interpretation of how a task
112
should be approached. In this respect, many of the students recognised that they did not have to accept the feedback provided by their peers. The following observation from S13, who was a keen advocate of involving more than one student in the feedback process, was illustrative of the general consensus:
Interviewer: I would argue that the process of weighing it up, even if you reject it, that process is a learning process in its own right.
S13: Yes, I think so. It would bring in more ideas. You know, listening to one person’s opinion would make you feel you could weigh the two and maybe get the better out of the two, rather than just listening to one person’s opinion. So I think having more people in the peer evaluation would bring in more weight and would bring you an opportunity to also weigh what you are listening and evaluate it (3621-3626).
The feedback process thus also contributed to empowering students to take responsibility for and to become more autonomous in their learning both in relation to the interactions with peers and in the way they have responded to feedback from a lecturer (see 4.1.3.D).
A final finding in relation to feedback was the degree to which students felt the participative process created opportunities for ongoing feedback throughout the module. Teachers seldom have the time to provide ongoing feedback, but participative assessment offers an alternative means of ensuring students are able to get additional feedback, while benefiting from empowering aspects of the process. Participative assessment thus has the potential to reduce, to a limited degree, the teacher’s workload, while simultaneously ensuring that students feel supported by a process that enhances their learning. This relationship, between the ongoing feedback enabled by the process and the students’ learning, is reflected in the following representative observation from S05:
I think the feedback process was really helpful, because, you know how on other modules you just get your assignment, but with this PLP we developed it from day one till the end. So, it was kind of like easier. And also getting feedback. They say feedback has to be an ongoing thing, so, it’s like, in this case we got feedback from day one till the end of the assignment, unlike other assignments where you just hand it in and then you just get the feedback [after submission]… so with this we developed it from the bottom up until the end. I think it was really, really helpful (2672-2680).
It should be clear from the above that students experienced the process of giving and receiving feedback as having contributed to both their learning in relation to the immediate task and in relation to their future professional development and that the process served to enhance the impact feedback can have on students’ learning. Furthermore, this aspect of the
113
process made a significant contribution to encouraging students to see themselves as part of an assessment community and created a dynamic environment for interactions between the students and the lecturer. The feedback process also provided a platform on which students could develop deeper approaches to learning discussed in the next section.