Record of Observation or Review of Teaching Practice
Session/artefact to be observed/reviewed:
- 2 Marking feedback guides (E1 + E2) with 1 marking template (To be used with the E2 marking guide)
- 3 examples of students work (1 for E1, 2 for E2)
- Final Marking feedback for each of the students.
- The unit brief.
Size of student group: 64
Observer: Matthew Plummer Fernández
Observee: Taylor Rapley
Note: This record is solely for exchanging developmental feedback between colleagues. Its reflective aspect informs PgCert and Fellowship assessment, but it is not an official evaluation of teaching and is not intended for other internal or legal applications such as probation or disciplinary action.
Part One
Observee to complete in brief and send to observer prior to the observation or review:
What is the context of this session/artefact within the curriculum?
Provided the brief and corresponding marking guides for the Leadership and Team Dynamics unit.
- As we expand as a course, we need to maintain efficiency and parity across marking especially if markers are brought in beyond the core Team/course Faculty.
- I have provided marking guides for both Element 1 (E1) and Element 2 (E2) these are used to guide the feedback process and help reason the grades of the learning outcomes. These would typically be presented during an initial meeting and then a parity meeting would be held between all markers to ensure our understanding is equal and on parity and if not, have a dialogue to understand how we can be and reach an agreement.
- The marking guides contain prewritten feedback phrases that need some input and editing based upon on the students work.
- The difference between E1 and E2 guides is that E1 shows the clear expectations from the brief, while E2 uses a checklist style template of the expectations from the brief to be used alongside the marking guide, to help provide evidence and secure the final grade and assist the final feedback edits based upon the marking guide.
- I hope to gain your insight into using these tools when giving feedback and if you prefer using the corresponding template with the marking guide. While giving insight into positives and negatives of using such a system.
- 1 team portfolio (That received an A +) is provided from this year to be used with E1 marking guide and
- 2 student submissions for E2 have been provided one received and A the other a C.
How long have you been working with this group and in what capacity?
- Since September 2024, submission 1 (E1 in December), submission 2 (E2 in January)
What are the intended or expected learning outcomes?
- I hope to gain your insight into using these tools when giving feedback and if you prefer using the corresponding template with the marking guide (and the value of using it). While giving insight into positives and negatives of using such a system.
- What information would a new marker need to know to begin marking and how would they like to receive that information (in terms of format).
- Any other general thoughts on the marking process provided.
What are the anticipated outputs (anything students will make/do)?
N/A
Are there potential difficulties or specific areas of concern?
- Will this take away from feedback from the students or will it add structure, parity and clear steps for improvement.
How will students be informed of the observation/review?
- N/A
What would you particularly like feedback on?
- To gain your insight into using these tools when giving feedback and if you prefer using the corresponding template with the marking guide. While giving insight into positives and negatives of using such a system.
- And what more information would a new marker need to know to begin marking and how would they like to receive that information (in terms of format).
- Any other general thoughts on this marking process.
How will feedback be exchanged?
- Through the review of practice form sent via email, happy to have a follow up call to discuss further as I know both Matthew and I are reviewing marking procedures.
Part Two
Observer to note down observations, suggestions and questions:
Taylor, thank you for sharing various documents to fully understand your marking process. Here are some of my thoughts and observations:
The marking templates are a great system for markers to follow and ensure parity across marking. The templates are very good at linking the feedback to the learning objectives. They also work well with UAL’s assessment criteria and use the same language; ‘excellent/ very good / good/ satisfactory’ and so on.
The approach would certainly help with marking on large cohorts and provide guidance for markers that would overwise be overwhelmed and pressed for time.
My question would be how rigid are these templates? Do personal tutors that mark work of the students they supervise get a chance to add tone that would be familiar to the students? Or are you aiming to provide a more official course-level response and tone that is the same across all marking?
One thing that I feel is perhaps lacking in your feedback are small details that acknowledge the student’s work (beyond mentioning evidence that matches the assessment criteria), for example, mentioning the name of the project, team name, student name, or a particular highlight that stood out such as a unique source of inspiration, or a thoughtful observation.
In the case of Haowen Chen, for example, your feedback says, “Particularly excellent use of Servant Leadership Theory”, but perhaps it would appear more personalised just by saying “Your contribution to the Social Media Agency Group makes excellent use of Servant Leadership Theory”.
Another observation is that by writing feedback for each learning outcome separately, you may get some repetition as there are inevitably overlaps in the material that contributes to each grade, or an overlap in what the assessment criteria covers (I personally find a lot of overlap across demonstrating ‘enquiry’, ‘knowledge’ and ‘process’).
In the case of Haowen Chen, for example, both learning outcome feedback sections mention ‘Excellent use of Gibbs Reflective mode’. Perhaps the second mention required rephrasing or focusing on an element that expands on the first mention.
Ironically, this student is using the Gibbs method to evaluate and analyse how they failed to act and resolve a conflict. This to me reveals how the template approach may fail to catch details and offer constructive feedback that is more individualised or useful. Although the student has cited two frameworks to achieve an A, the student struggled to provide good leadership and avoided the conflict. This may not affect the student’s mark, but the feedback is an opportunity to add something like ‘although you struggled to intervene in the team’s conflict, your reflection demonstrates self-evaluation and an analysis of the issue [optional add-ons: through excellent use of the Gibbs framework’ / ‘For next time, consider…’].
I appreciate that with larger cohorts and more marking to do, it is hard to notice details and expand much on the template. I guess a balance can be made depending on marking workload. The feedback is used primarily to explain the grades and a template performs this very well, but I think there’s joy for students in receiving feedback that makes them feel known by the team.
Hope that helps, Taylor! I enjoyed studying your course assignment, marking, and student work, thanks for sharing and good luck with the course.
Part Three
Observee to reflect on the observer’s comments and describe how they will act on the feedback exchanged:
*waiting on Part 3 from Observee