Fuller, richer feedback, more easily delivered, using tablet PCs

Abstract

We have developed a method to use tablet PCs to enable markers more efficiently to give written feedback on students ’ work. Comments may either be made in handwriting, or may be typed, or may be presented in type following handwriting recognition. Additionally, any comments so made can be stored and reused, allowing for editing. Importantly, feedback can be made richer by including forward links for students to follow up on common mistakes that they have made so that their engagement with feedback is more constructive. Such feedback would otherwise be very tedious to provide if marking on paper was used exclusively. We have run this system successfully for two years to mark essays in a large class of 450+ students, using twenty markers. This volume of work was efficiently handled and involved no paper. Checking of marks and assuring consistent standards was much more easily done than with paper. We consulted students and markers. Students take the system in their stride. They are well able to provide essays, with diagrams and figures. Markers fell into a number of groups. We have learned that there are a variety of marking styles and developed the software to accommodate these. The only software required is Microsoft Word and Excel. The problem addressed Good quality feedback is the most single powerful influence on student achievement in higher education (Hattie, 1987). But a number of surveys with students shows that satisfaction with feedback on assessment is the least of all areas considered. (Hounsell et al, 2005, Krause et al, 2005, Surridge, 2006, Hounsel et al, 2007). Several reasons contribute. Too long a gap between submission and feedback is detrimental and a source of dissatisfaction (Gibbs &Simpson, 2004) Crook et al (2005) have evidence from focus groups that students sometimes simply cannot read a marker’s handwriting. They also found that students considered tick sheets and/or boxes in which the marker makes comments to be too formulaic.