Digital Education team blog
  • We support Staff and Students using technology to enhance education at UCL.

    Here you'll find updates on institutional developments, projects we're involved in, updates on educational technology, events, case studies and personal experiences (or views!).

  • Subscribe to the Digital Education blog

  • Meta

  • Tags

  • A A A

    Archive for the 'e-Assessment' Category

    Moving to Turnitin Feedback Studio

    By Janice K M Kiugu, on 5 June 2017

    A few months ago we alerted you to the fact that Turnitin will be moving all users to its new grading interface known as Feedback Studio.

    At present, users can toggle between using Turnitin’s old interface – Turnitin Classic and its latest version Feedback Studio. From 1st August 2017, all users will have to use Feedback Studio to view originality reports, grade work and provide feedback.

    Though a number of you have already moved to using Feedback Studio as it is the default version available on UCL Moodle, some staff have chosen to revert back to the Classic version. In preparation for the switch off of the ‘Classic’ version, we recommend that all Moodle users have a go at using Feedback Studio.

    The 2-minute video below is a brief walkthrough of Turnitin Feedback Studio.


    Learn more about Feedback Studio

    • Quick Tips for mastering Feedback Studio
    • Trial Feedback Studio: Please note that not all functionality is enabled on this demo version. You can however enable feedback studio on assignments that you may currently be in the process of marking by clicking on the ‘Try Turnitin feedback Studio’ link located at the top of an open assignment.
    • For additional guidance on using Feedback studio see our user guides
    • Watch this video comparison between Feedback Studio and Turnitin Classic
    • View our past communication regarding the move to Feedback Studio

    Moving to Turnitin Feedback Studio – multiple ways to mark with an updated look

    By Annora Eyt-Dessus, on 28 April 2017

    From summer 2017 Turnitin will be moving all users to their updated viewing and grading tool, Feedback Studio. Most UCL staff and students are already using Feedback Studio so will not see any change, but if you’re still using the ‘Classic’ version of the tool you will no longer have this option from late July 2017. You’ll still find the functionality you’re used to, but with an updated look and feel.

    So what does Feedback Studio offer? For a quick tour of the new features of Feedback Studio, and differences with the ‘Classic’ version, you can watch the short video above from Turnitin. (NB. Multiple markers feature will not be enabled initially, and the section shown 4:00mins+ is not relevant to Turnitin through Moodle.)

    Beyond being able to view and navigate similarity reports, it also offers staff a variety of ways to mark – including audio comments, rubrics and saved re-usable comments. Most of this functionality has been available to UCL staff for some time, but Turnitin have been working on the design of their interface.

    For instance, selection of the wide variety of tools Turnitin offers is now done by using icons set alongside the paper for easier faster marking. You may also be looking for a ‘Save’ button, but Turnitin now saves your comments as you move between papers using the arrows in the top right of the screen.

    This new version also aims to be more accessible, with viewing and grading easier on a greater variety of devices using a responsive design, as well as for those using screen readers and keyboards for navigation.

    If you want to try out the new version of Feedback studio, without logging in to Moodle and setting up an assignment, you can explore an interactive demo from Turnitin.

    Universities across the UK will soon be making the change as well as UCL, and we had the opportunity to hear from colleagues at the University of Kent, in partnership with Turnitin, at the recent MoodleMoot.ie conference earlier this April. They spoke of their success in moving to online marking in conjunction with the move to the new Feedback Studio, with over 70% overall of all marks now returned online. Key elements in their success were offering guidance for both staff and students (ours can be found here for staff and students), and offering repeated reminders of the change throughout the summer, so that all staff had a chance to be made aware.

    If you have any concerns or questions about this change, please consult the guidance, and email digi-ed@ucl.ac.uk with any issues.

    UCL 2034: Improving the ‘Student Experience’ with Digital Exams

    By Karen A M Shackleford-Cesare, on 6 April 2017

    Rationale

    One may argue that UCL students are over-assessed. But, regardless of your take on this, it stands to reason that where examinations are used to assess learning, it is worth investing in delivery systems that give students the best possible experience and outcomes. These systems could conceivably have the following aims, to:

    1. Improve the functionality, usability and accessibility of the questions on the exam
    2. Offer greater flexibility in terms of the time, place and resources needed to host an exam
    3. Improve the support given to both students sitting exams and the staff facilitating and/or grading them
    4. Potentially reduce the time between sitting some exams and obtaining results/feedback
    5. Potentially increase transparency in marking and confidence in the grades awarded
    6. Reduce potential for errors in marking and from transcribing/transferring marks
    7. Reduce the workloads of both academic and administrative staff
    8. Reduce costs around printing, transporting, securing and storing paper

    Acknowledging that assessment and feedback are ongoing areas of student concern, and that the Education Strategy commits us to addressing and resolving persistent challenges in this area (https://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/education-strategy), Brunel University’s approach to digitising some examinations is interesting.

    E-Assessment Management at Brunel

    Whereas UCL uses the quiz tool in Moodle for online exams, Brunel University has subscribed to a cloud-based digital exam platform called WISEflow for theirs. Like Turnitin this subscribed service can be linked to various VLEs including Moodle. In the case of Brunel, this happens to be Blackboard. Tutors create their quizzes/exams, which can be accessed indirectly via a link on a course page in their VLE or directly by logging into the secure WISEflow website.

    WISEflow-Select Login

    WISEflow provides tutors with 50 varied question types with quite sophisticated features allowing for different media to be embedded and for example, virtual tools, such as a ruler and a protractor to be used to measure the lines and angles of diagrams in questions. It also supports essay questions that allow a student to respond with a 1,000 to 3,000 word essay. This advantageous for exams in subjects such as law, history and literature, etc. WISEflow also has a number of features to ensure that student’s responses aren’t lost whilst being written.

    According to Niels Berg Conradsen of UNIwise,

    “WISEflow features a very robust lockdown browser module. It carries a text editor in the lockdown browser that also serves as a word processor. The students can structure their essay with headlines and even embed pictures from their webcam. Moreover, the student has a revision tool at their disposal, so they can revert the essay to former editions if they so desire”.

    This platform is sufficiently secure to support bring-your-own-device (BYOD) examinations. At a 1-day event at Brunel on March 17, 2017 attendees, (myself included), had an opportunity to hear positive feedback from Brunel’s staff and students about their experience using WISEflow, and to use it ourselves on our own devices.

    WISEflow enables tutors to create and manage digital exams, which they can assign to specific students. They can then mark the materials that the students submit in WISEflow. The marking tools are similar to those in the Moodle and Turnitin assignments. WISEflow can also be used for the submission of coursework.

    Benefits of digital exams generally for various stakeholders are listed below and may be also achieved with Moodle quizzes, (although in Moodle’s case additional software would be needed to lock the browser).

    Advantages for students:

    • It’s feasible for students to take exams remotely
    • No need to write long hand for hours (increasingly students may have little sustained handwriting practice)
    • It’s much easier to correct mistakes and make changes to responses on online exam scripts than on paper
    • It’s feasible for students to get feedback beyond just a grade on exams taken
    • Students may be able to get their results faster
    • It’s feasible to take the exam on a familiar device, their own laptop
    • Accessibility features easier to incorporate

    Advantages for tutors, administrators, invigilators:

    • Exam papers don’t have to be printed, packaged, secured and distributed to exam centres
    • No challenging handwriting to decipher
    • No paper scripts to collect, secure or transport
    • No scripts to store for the short to long term
    • Scripts can be printed as required
    • Tools exist for invigilators to monitor students’ progress through a paper they’re sitting
    • Tools exist for tutors to analyse students’ responses to each question
    • Easy to facilitate access to scripts by moderators, second markers and external examiners
    • The cost of a streamlined infrastructure for online exams may not exceed that of the current paper based examination system in place.

    Importantly, Brunel also benefited from the involvement and support of their Registry and Examinations Office in the launch of this project.

    What WISEflow can do for you…

    There are other Providers of Digital Examination Systems that may also be considered.

    Some Cons of Acquiring Another App

    This piece has highlighted many of the pros of acquiring specialist, purpose-built kit. However, some of the problems that would need to be addressed include:

    • Providing students with a “one-stop shop” for accessing their results and feedback. UCL has part sponsored the development of the MyFeedback tool in Moodle for this purpose but could it retrieve this data from a third party product?
    • Additional training and support needed
    • The integration of a new app with Moodle
    • Identifying and equipping enough rooms with adequate WiFi and power points to support BYOD
    • Adequate provision of suitable computer suites
    • Cost

    Cost Differentials

    It would be informative to compare the estimated cost of running paper-based exams with that of online exams. Instinctively, one may focus on the costs associated with the actually staging of an exam. By so doing, the paper option may seem much cheaper, if only because computing paraphernalia isn’t required. However, costs may start to even out when preparatory printing, storing and distribution expenses, (not to mention the man-hours needed), are taken into account. Plus, cost associated with moving, securing and storing hard-copy exam scripts.

    Where the computing infrastructure is exists for other purposes and would be present even if no online exams to use it, then one could argue in favour of discounting the cost it may otherwise present.

    Observations by Attendees

    See what others had to say:


    You said, we did

    By Jessica Gramp, on 22 March 2017

    A number of recommendations emerged from the E-Learning Reports developed in 2013 across the Bartlett, Engineering and Maths and Physical Sciences (BEAMS) departments. Here’s what you asked for and what the Digital Education Advisor for the faculty arranged in response, in collaboration with staff from across the Information Services Division.

     

    quoteYou wanted to import module timetable information from the Common Timetable into Moodle.
    We developed a Common Timetable iCal feed to import module timetables for displaying in the Moodle calendar.

     

    quoteYou wanted a simplified quiz creation process with guidelines and checklists for importing questions.
    We purchased the Moodle Word Table format plugin to help staff quickly develop quizzes with simple question types (not calculated or drag and drop) in Word, including those with images and LaTeX.

     

    quoteYou wanted us to run staff workshops and demos to increase knowledge of e-learning tools & their potential use.
    We ran workshops across the faculties and in individual departments catered to the needs of the departments.

     

    quoteYou wanted to simplify the process for exporting grades out of Moodle and into Portico.
    We imported the UCL student number into Moodle and added this column to the Moodle Gradebook export, simplifying the uploading of grades from Moodle into Portico. A video explaining how to move grades from Moodle to Portico is now available on the UCL E-Learning Wiki – a space for staff to share their e-learning practice:

     

    Bug in duplicated Moodle assignments

    By Rod Digges, on 8 December 2016

    We’ve recently come across a bug in Moodle (not Turnitin) assignments. The bug shows up when a blind marking/anonymous Moodle assignment that has been used and student identities revealed is then copied for re-use. The copy of the assignment will look from its settings like a blind marking/anonymous assignment but it will behave as if the ‘Reveal student identities’ link had been clicked and student names will be visible in both the grading interface and the course gradebook. The quickest way to check if a ‘blind marking/anonymous’ assignment is truly in an anonymous state is to click on its link and look for the presence of the ‘Reveal student identities’ link in the assignment’s settings block, if the link is there the assignment is anonymous.

    For the moment we advise that Moodle assignments are not created by duplication of old assignments but are created as completely new assignments.

    screenshot - assignment settings block

    Comparing Moodle Assignment and Turnitin for assessment criteria and feedback

    By Mira Vogel, on 8 November 2016

    Elodie Douarin (Lecturer in Economics, UCL School of Slavonic and Eastern European Studies) and I have been comparing how assessment criteria can be presented to engage a large cohort of students with feedback in Moodle Assignment and Turnitin Assignment (report now available). We took a mixed methods approach using questionnaire, focus group and student screencasts as they accessed their feedback and responded to our question prompts. Here are some our key findings.

    Spoiler – we didn’t get a clear steer over which technology is (currently) better – they have different advantages. Students said Moodle seemed “better-made” (which I take to relate to theming issues rather than software architecture ones) while the tutor appreciated the expanded range of feedback available in Moodle 3.1.

    Assessment criteria

    • Students need an opportunity to discuss, and ideally practice with, the criteria in advance, so that they and the assessors can reach a shared view of the standards by which their work will be assessed.
    • Students need to know that criteria exist and be supported to use them. Moodle Assignment is good for making rubrics salient, whereas Turnitin requires students to know to click an icon.
    • Students need support to benchmark their own work to the criteria. Moodle or Turnitin rubrics allow assessors to indicate which levels students have achieved. Moreover, Moodle allows a summary comment for each criterion.
    • Since students doubt that assessors refer to the criteria during marking, it is important to make the educational case for criteria (i.e. beyond grading) as a way of reaching a shared understanding about standards, for giving and receiving feedback, and for self/peer assessment.

    Feedback

    • The feedback comments most valued by students explain the issue, make links with the assessment criteria, and include advice about what students should do next.
    • Giving feedback digitally is legible and easily accessible from any web connected device.
    • Every mode of feedback should be conspicuously communicated to students and suggestions on how to cross-reference these different modes should be provided. Some thoughts should be given to ways to facilitate access to and interpretation of all the elements of feedback provided.
    • Students need to know that digital feedback exists and how to access it. A slideshow of screenshots would allow tutors to hide and unhide slides depending on which feedback aspects they are using.

    Effort

    • The more feedback is dispersed between different modes, the more effortful it is for students to relate it to their own work and thinking. Where more than one mode is used, there is a need to distinguish between the purpose and content of each kind of feedback, signpost their relationships, and communicate this to students. Turnitin offers some support for cross referencing between bubble comments and criteria.
    • It would be possible to ask students to indicate on their work which mode (out of a choice of possibilities) they would like assessors to use.
    • The submission of formative assessment produced with minimal effort may impose a disproportionate burden on markers, who are likely to be commenting on mistakes that students could have corrected easily by themselves. Shorter formative assessment, group works, clearer statements of the benefits of submitting formative work may all help limiting the incidence of low-effort submissions.
    • If individual summary comments have a lot in common, consider releasing them as general feedback for the cohort, spending the saved time on more student-specific comments instead. However, this needs to be signposted clearly to help students cross-reference with their individual feedback.
    • As a group, teaching teams can organise a hands-on session with Digital Education to explore Moodle Assignment and Turnitin from the perspectives of students, markers and administrators. This exposure will help immeasurably with designing efficient, considerate processes and workflows.
    • The kind of ‘community work’ referred to by Bloxham and colleagues (2015) would be an opportunity to reach shared understandings of the roles of students and markers with respect to criteria and feedback, which would in turn help to build confidence in the assessment process.

     

    Bloxham, S., den-Outer, B., Hudson, J., Price, M., 2015. Let’s stop the pretence of consistent marking: exploring the multiple limitations of assessment criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 1–16. doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1024607