In their latest research project, Abbi Shaw (UCL Arts & Humanities Faculty Learning Technology Lead) and Jesper Hansen (UCL Arts & Humanities Arena Faculty Lead) surveyed staff in UCL Arts & Humanities about their experiences of feedback and assessment. Abbi and Jesper’s research sheds light on what staff see as constituting effective feedback and how they have experienced student engagement, or the lack thereof, with feedback. The report raises important questions for future discussions concerning student engagement, staff workloads, inclusivity, and teaching processes at UCL Arts & Humanities. To find out more about their findings, we asked Abbi and Jesper some key questions about their work:

“KCL Examination Day” by KiloCharlieLima, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

1. To start, can you tell us a bit about the background and main objectives of your 2024/25 feedback and assessment survey of UCL Arts & Humanities?

Over the last four years, we have put in a lot of work to centre the actual experiences of students and staff in our Faculty. This is important as it links research done in other places with the reality at UCL Arts & Humanities, which is often both similar and different from other universities and faculties. We have found that this focus facilitates discussions about the direction the Faculty should take in terms of education, and it makes the data more pertinent to all relevant stakeholders: we can actually point to what our own students and staff are telling us. Another advantage is that we have been able to significantly shorten the delay between our research and the dissemination of our findings. Normally there would be years between research being done and findings being published in a peer-reviewed journal. By contrast, our research is normally disseminated in the term following data collection.

This year’s topic came about for two reasons. Firstly, feedback and assessment are at the top of UCL’s priorities and, as such, it makes sense to align our work with it. And, secondly, it is an area where we, as a Faculty, see students express concerns in the National Student Survey. While we are doing better than some other Faculties, there is plenty of room for improvement. When coupled with the fact that feedback and assessment are very important for students and affect their overall experience of studying, it just made sense.

2. What does effective feedback look like?

There is plenty of research on effective feedback, and we know that clarity and actionability are key. This means that students have to understand the feedback and be able to use it to improve their future work. Professor David Boud, one of the world’s leading experts on feedback, spoke at UCL’s Education Conference some years ago. He argues that something cannot be considered feedback unless it has an impact on the student. At UCL, we now ask staff to think about feedback from two different perspectives: a mark justification, which helps students understand the mark they received, and developmental feedback, which helps students improve and, ideally, achieve a better mark in the future. The bespoke part of feedback is then relevant because no two students are the same: if we rely too heavily, for instance, on pre-written comments, it risks not being particularly developmental for the student reading it.

In our Faculty, we know that staff spend a lot of time giving feedback, and we know that there is a desire to help students improve. So this is not, we would argue, about us not trying or not wanting to give good and effective feedback, but about a disconnect between what we are doing and what students expect and see as useful.

3. How do workload, time constraints, and other barriers impact staff’s ability to provide effective feedback?

Given what we outlined above, it might sound like staff are being asked to spend more time giving feedback. But that is not the case: more feedback does not equal better and more effective feedback, if anything it’s often the other way around. We know from other research that students generally do not request large amounts of feedback from their tutors. Rather, they want targeted feedback that clearly explains the mark (and here we suggest linking feedback directly to the marking criteria), and some specific ideas. A good example could be a list of 3-4 bullet points which explain how their work can be improved in future, ideally with some signposting of further support. If you find yourself writing longer feedback, sometimes a list of bullet points can be used to sum up your main action points: ‘Based on the feedback I have given you above and in the margins, I suggest you consider the following three points in your next assignment…’

Staff answering our survey discussed two distinct barriers to providing effective feedback. One concerned anonymity: how do we give bespoke feedback when we don’t know who we are talking to? This is a topic that is being debated across the sector. While we certainly are asked to use anonymous assessment where possible, there are some caveats and workarounds. Firstly, UCL’s academic manual clearly states that we can use non-anonymous marking where there are good reasons for doing so. This might be if you are doing continuous assessment, where students work on their assessment over time (this already happens in the Faculty in, for instance, the English department’s tutorial system). Secondly, some tutors use feedback cover sheets to give students a clearer stake in the feedback process. This happens a lot in, for instance, the Institute of Education, and it might be something we can learn from in A&H. Examples of things students might be asked could be:

• Are there specific areas you would like me to comment on (such as referencing, your engagement with sources, your introduction and conclusion)?
• What did you find particularly challenging in this assignment?
• Briefly outline the feedback you have got in your previous assignments and how you have responded to it in this assignment.
• What format would you like your overall feedback comments in: written or recorded audio?
  

  Fountain pen, courtesy of Petar Milošević via Wikimedia Commons.

The other barrier that staff mentioned was the knowledge that students often don’t read the feedback we give. It can be very disillusioning if we believe that students ignore the feedback we invest an enormous amount of time and energy to create. The way we see it, we could choose to blame the students. Or we could try to understand why they are not reading feedback and discuss how we can make it more attractive for them to engage with it. This question of why some students don’t see value in engaging with their feedback is one that we will explore further this term as we survey students in the Faculty. We will report back on our findings, of course, but we also invite staff to consider how we can change our feedback processes to align more with students’ needs.

4. At the day-to-day level of teaching, how might we build a shared understanding between students and staff of what feedback is and how it can help student progress?

When thinking about how others involved in the teaching, learning and assessment of students might support the development of student feedback literacy, we can look at managing their expectations around feedback and demonstrating putting feedback into practice – for instance, by working through a marked demonstration piece of work. We can also look at developing students’ own capacity to give feedback as a method of supporting their understanding of it, and its relevance. This might be through responding to student work such as presentations, or forum posts, or as we see in the Slade School of Fine Art, where students regularly undertake a collective feedback-giving process, by making space throughout the module for students to respond to each other’s work and ideas.

5. Many respondents believed formative assessment was useful yet expressed caveats about the process. What steps can be taken to improve engagement with formative assessment among students?

Many of our students are high achievers who are very strategic about their time. They all have competing demands on their time: studying for classes, preparing for assessments, social life, jobs (part-time or full-time), caring responsibilities and so on. If we consider formative assessment within this matrix, is it really a surprise that many students choose not to do it?

If we want students to engage with formative tasks – and we do want that, as we know it is beneficial for students – we probably need to rethink them and, just like with feedback, consider how we can make them more attractive to students. Firstly, we need to think about how we introduce these tasks to students. Do we tell them they are optional and not that important? Or do we emphasise that they are expected to do them (just like they are expected to prepare for classes)? And do we explain how doing the formative will be helpful when it comes to completing summative tasks?

6. If, in an ideal hypothetical world, you could make one innovative and less conventional change to UCL Arts & Humanities’ assessment processes, what would it be?

We have already made some really positive strides in the Faculty where we now discuss topics like feedback and assessment much more than we did just a handful of years ago. This is important as feedback and assessment cannot be addressed by looking at one or two parameters – they are too complex for that. What we need is a review of how assessment is used in modules, how module assessments come together at the programme level, and how feedback is central to students’ academic journeys. This will, potentially, be effective in ensuring that new students don’t lose faith in the feedback they get and therefore want to engage with it; which will, in turn, shape how staff engage with the feedback. Concrete examples might include how personal tutors support student feedback literacy, or how staff office hours are used more strategically.

7. What’s next for this project?

We intend to run a survey of A&H students in order to improve our understanding of their experiences. As we go through processes of curricular improvement including PEP2, and EASE, we have opportunities to gather and examine the data around assessment in modules and programmes, as described above. We will also continue to discuss how we can best support the Faculty in resolving some of the issues highlighted in our staff survey and developing students’ relationships with feedback.

UCL Wilkins Building, photographed by “Diliff” via WikiMedia Commons.

Interview with Joana Jacob Ramalho, Lecturer (Teaching), SELCS, UCL.

CHE: Hi Joana, a BIG congratulations on being awarded a Student Choice Award for Exceptional Feedback at the annual UCL Education Awards. Feedback is an area of education that is receiving increasing attention from our students – they expect feedback to be detailed and timely, and they rightly expect feedback will help them improve their academic performance. So, naturally, we would love to learn more about how you do it. But first, tell us about what you teach and how you would describe yourself as an educator.

Joana Jacob Ramalho (SELCS)

Joana: I teach Gothic Literature, Spanish Film, Musical Satire, Intermedial Comparison, Lusophone culture and Portuguese language. As an educator, my goal is to guide students to reach their potential, which sounds cliché (I know!), but in fact requires training, experience, patience and, above all, creativity. It means constantly tailoring your modules and materials to your students’ different learning styles, combining inclusive techniques that cater for diversity. I want my students to be curious and remain curious throughout their studies (if not their lives!). I feel it is my duty to empower them to ask questions and be comfortable when addressing their concerns. I teach them about culture, politics, history, the arts, and work with topics that are relevant to them – even when they do not immediately realise why. I help them gain transferable skills they might need for further study and future employment, but they also help me make me a better educator. The students are not empty vessels, waiting to receive knowledge; learning is a dialogue, a conversation.

CHE: What methods or strategies do you use for providing feedback?

Joana: I use a combination of numerical, qualitative (written and oral), and peer feedback to teach mostly small to medium groups (~22 students). Whenever possible, feedback should strive to offer students the possibility to develop their ideas or reorient them, suggesting either complementary or alternative avenues. To accomplish this, some form of qualitative feedback should always accompany a numerical mark, whether that means written feedback or a brief chat where the student can ask questions. On the advice of a colleague from ARENA, I have recently introduced peer feedback into my teaching and the students have welcomed it enthusiastically. In language modules, the students experience, in pairs, what it is like to mark and grade a composition or translation. In content modules, there is a peer-to-peer discussion (with minor input from the tutor) in the seminar half of each lecture.

My department encourages formative feedback and I find it essential to guide students in their learning, while giving us a chance to check in with them and adapt our pedagogical strategies (PhD supervision, for instance, is all about formative feedback). A mix of in-class and at-home tasks has worked best for my students. Moodle offers a wide range of activities, from fora to quizzes and interactive videos, that have become familiar tools in my modules. The type of formative tasks varies, but overall these consist in exam-type assignments for language modules and essay plans, sequence analyses, close readings and annotated tables of contents for film and literature modules.

As for summative assessment, I tend to overdo it on the feedback front… I want students to benefit from the same high-quality guidance I enjoyed when I was a student at UCL and I write… a lot, often managing to mark only one essay a day. This is of course not ideal or ultimately sustainable if I want to still have time to do research! In the last couple of years, I have therefore developed templates for each of my modules that allow me to continue offering comprehensive feedback without spending so much time on marking.

Another way to implement change is to develop a staff-student partnership. I led a ChangeMakers project on feedback and assessment in 2020-21, which resulted in a new set of marking criteria designed with a group of first and second-year undergraduates. The project team emphasised how this initiative made them feel like they were actively contributing to the restructuring of the curriculum.

Whichever strategies or methods I use, timeliness is a core aspect of giving feedback. I want my students to be able to read through the comments and have time to act on them. In the first week of term, I explain when and what type of feedback the students can expect. As an example, my film and comparative literature students know they will have the opportunity to submit an essay plan. I set the submission deadline towards the end of term, to give students the chance to write about any of the texts mentioned in the essay questions. An earlier deadline would mean excluding some of those texts or having the students prepare a plan on a topic or text we have not yet explored, which would be counterproductive. Importantly, I make it a point of always handing back the plans before the end of term, so that students can come to me with any questions. This means marking dozens of plans for different modules in the space of a week, but it is one of the aspects the students feel most grateful about. Returning feedback in a timely fashion is key.

CHE: Why do you think students respond so well to your way of providing feedback?

Joana: The students tell me they understand what they have done well and how to improve. They stress the fact that I use in-text comments along with a detailed overall commentary especially helpful. I cover a little bit of everything in the in-text comments, from formatting issues and written expression to reasoning, validity of arguments and structure. I created a series of labels on turnitin for this purpose, which I can reuse and add further comments to. Positive feedback is important as well, so I have lots of labels ranging from ‘good’ to ‘great’ and ‘praise’.

In addition, I provide examples of how to address the issues I flag. For instance, instead of simply pointing out that students should ‘expand’ or ‘engage with the quotation’, I offer a precise suggestion on how to do that. My goal is not only to help students get a higher grade, but help them to think. When I advise them to add more nuance or avoid rushing from one argument to the next without properly supporting their point, my hope is that this exercise encourages them to reflect and use their critical judgement as they engage with the world around them, questioning that which might appear a given, and refrain from jumping to conclusions without checking the facts.

CHE: Where and how did you learn to provide effective feedback?

Joana: With my parents and at UCL. My parents are both teachers and much loved by their students. They unfailingly go above and beyond their duties, staying longer after class and using different approaches to feedback that cater to a diverse range of students. I’ve got a lot of tips from them over the years.

During my Master’s in Film Studies at UCL, the feedback I received was extraordinary. By that I mean, it was detailed and build me up. I remember receiving my first assignment (a formative 500-word sequence analysis) and all I could see was red. Almost every sentence was underlined and accompanied by a single word scribbled on the margins: expand, detail, rephrase, restructure, good, source?, etc. It was a turning point for me as a student and (little did I know at the time) as an educator. The initial shock quickly subsided, as I realised I now knew exactly how to improve. I still keep that piece of paper!

Another aspect my students comment on is my availability to chat with them and provide additional feedback in a more informal setting (outside the classroom). That is also something I learned as a UCL student. My lecturers, the Film Studies programme director, the Head of the Spanish & Latin American Studies department and, in particular, my Master’s and PhD supervisors always seemed to have time for me. Their generosity was central to shape my pedagogy.

Giving good feedback has been a learning curve. Trying to figure out what works for which students on which platforms is a process of trial and error. In my 15 years working at UCL, the sustained sharing of teaching practices within SELCS-CMII has been crucial: the impromptu brainstorming sessions in the corridors of Foster Court, feedback workshops, second marking, doctoral co-supervision, and programme and Language Coordination meetings have introduced me to innovative methods and creative strategies to produce effective feedback.

CHE: Has your idea of what effective feedback is changed over the course of your career?

Joana: The idea itself has not changed, but the methods and strategies have certainly evolved! My feedback has become more comprehensive and more targeted. In my year-long language modules, I can tailor my comments to each individual student’s needs, which is a privilege of small-group teaching. As for content modules, I have learned to focus on specific areas, depending on whether I am marking undergraduate or postgraduate work.

CHE: What are your top 3 tips for effective feedback?

Joana: Detail – Relevance – Timeliness

Thank you so much for sharing your experiences and expertise with us, Joana.