Assessing learning and exchanging feedback
Introduction & Background
I am the Year Leader for BA1 Textile Design. At the start of year 1 Unit 1 and 2 are both Pass Fail units, the reason behind this is to reduce stress and competition when newly entering a course. This approach aims to encourage collaboration, experimentation and put a greater focus on learning, self-direction and intrinsic motivation.
This academic year (24/25) I implemented a dialogic assessment practice, which is new approach to assessment on the BA Textile Design.
All students were offered a 1-1 tutorial to discuss their completed projects with a tutor. These tutorials focused on the strengths of their work and areas for development. In Unit 1, particular attention was given to unpacking the learning outcomes to help students fully understand UAL’s methods of assessment. The tutorials also provided pastoral support, such as signposting to Student Services or Language Support, and included discussions about their specialism choices.
In addition to these tutorials, all students received written feedback.
We also ran interim reviews and provided assessment briefings before the final assessments for both projects, which were held in larger group settings. However, these sessions were poorly attended, despite having better attendance with previous year groups.
In preparation with the staff team for these sessions I prepared ‘Tutorial guidance notes, suggested assessment tutorial structure and learning outcomes. We also held a meeting where the ideas around dialogic were discussed, and staff feedback so we could implement any changes to the method/planning beforehand.
Aims and Objectives of this Approach
- To offer real, personal and meaningful feedback and to demystify the assessment process for students: Written feedback alone can be open to interpretation, so having a discussion allows for real-time clarification.
- To help students translate and clarify the learning outcomes and assessment requirements.
- As this is a key moment in the student journey, the tutorial provides time for pastoral support and for students to ask questions and receive feedback.
- During Unit 2, students rotate between specialist areas and must choose their specialism at the end of the project. This tutorial offers supportive conversations to help students make an informed decision based on their assessment results.
- Possible benefits for staff, who may find writing feedback this a more achievable way of providing feedback within this session.
Response
Some staff found it stressful. We had taken this into account, as all staff were given a small number of tutees for the time allocated. Unit 1: 30 mins each, Unit 2: 20 mins each with more break for notes and writing.
Colleagues did not have to write up the feedback there and then as in a pre-meeting it had been mentioned this might be an issue.
Student response was good, most students attended their tutorial, and we also offered a follow up time for those who did not make their time. ISA and EC students were offered a tutorial on an appropriate day.
The atmosphere in the room was energetic and positive, students seemed to leave their sessions happy.
It was a good opportunity for all the staff team from each unit to spend the day working together as often the days were different.
Evaluation and reflections
I was keen to introduce a student-centred assessment practice to Year 1, and overall, I felt this approach was positive. In previous years, students often questioned their feedback, and I personally found assessment briefings challenging, as I struggled to unpack the language and support individual students in understanding how it related to their work.
Unpacking the learning outcomes fostered positive engagement and understanding. This raised the question of whether, during future modifications, the language should be revised to make translating or clarifying unnecessary.
The interim reviews had poor attendance, despite higher participation in previous year groups. It seems students may have been reluctant to share their work with a larger group. However, the 1-on-1 tutor sessions seemed to resonate more with this group.
I wanted to offer students the opportunity to ‘self-assess,’ giving them space to have agency in the discussion.
As both units are pass/fail, this was an ideal opportunity to try a new approach to dialogic assessment. Pass/fail units can be confusing for new students from graded environments, potentially impacting their motivation and engagement. It also allows students to gauge where they are achieving and what support they need for their development.
During my peer review with Carys, she highlighted how I had used the term ‘attendance’ when unpacking LO3: ‘Apply creative attributes and qualities such as initiative, problem-solving, timekeeping, and engagement when working on a project (Process).’ We discussed the role of ‘attendance’ in relation to LO3, specifically timekeeping, and how engagement differs from mere attendance. I reflected on the importance of this distinction and how I might explore it further with other tutors.
References
Teaching and Learning exchange. (2021) ‘Moving to pass fail assessment in 2020’, The Exchange blog, 7 Jan. https://tle.myblog.arts.ac.uk/moving-to-pass-fail-assessment-in-2020-part-1/).
Addison, N. (2014) ‘Doubting learning outcomes in higher education contexts: from Performativity towards Emergence and Negotiation, The Author, pp 313-325
Brooks, K. (2008) ‘‘Could do better’. Students’ critique of written feedback’, University of North England Bristol, pp.1-5
Teaching and Learning exchange. (2021) ‘Bending the rules with Dr Gurnam Singh’, The Exchange blog, 21 April. https://tle.myblog.arts.ac.uk/bending-the-rules-with-dr-gurnam-singh/