27 June 2012 ............... Length about 900 words (6,000 bytes).
(Document started on 24 Dec 2011.)
This is a WWW document maintained by
Steve Draper, installed at http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/~steve/talks/rola2.html.
You may copy it.
How to refer to it.
Web site logical path:
2-D feedback (ipsative and cohort-based)
Title: 2-D feedback: (ipsative and cohort-based)
Date/time: Thursday 26 July 2012, 10am-3pm
(my own slot: 1:30 - 2:00pm).
Occasion: HEA workshop:
"Implementing best practice guidelines to promote
assessment for learning: challenges and rewards"
University of Dundee
Dalhousie Building, Room: 2F11
Dalhousie Building, Old Hawkhill, Balfour Street, Dundee, DD1 4HB )
How to get there:
School of Psychology,
University of Glasgow.
My web notes on 2-D feedback
The "interACT" JISC project, which the workshop is based on
(Rola's project's blog)
My talk on prompting student processing of feedback
"What are learners actually regulating when given feedback?"
British Journal of Educational Technology vol.40 no.2 pp.306-315
The departure point for this talk is the question
"What are learners actually regulating when given feedback?" (Draper, 2009).
The answer to that is often "self-regulation of effort" not the accuracy of
bits of their content knowledge. My observation is that most students need a
mark to self-regulate their effort, and use them far more than they do
open-ended / qualitative comments.
This talk calls marks/grades "feedback" even though they are quantitative
and superficially summative, because they are used formatively to modify
learner behaviour (their effort). Yet the numbers or codes in which teachers
express marks are poor by themselves at communicating what the student needs
to know: should I work harder or less hard at this?
2-D feedback is letting the learner know how they are doing both relative to
their previous performance (ipsative) and relative to the rest of the class
(e.g. their rank in class, or a grade if they know what the grades mean in
terms of other students' performance).
The problem this addresses is the unhelpfulness of common practice in HEIs of
some absolute scale with grade descriptors, which however don't give the
student any usable comparisons for the mark they receive. Like giving a volume
in minims, a weight in scruples, or a temperature in degrees Réaumur:
numbers actually only are useful to people who already remember, as comparison
points, the numbers of some other cases measured on the same scale.
Draft design principle: (the workshop was couched to be about "best
Ensure students can translate their marks into usable information
for their self-regulatory decisions
To book (no charge, limited to 40 places) email
Web site logical path:
[Top of this page]