Papers by Joelle Adams
Understanding Arts and Humanities Students' Experiences of Assessment and Feedback
This two-phase ethnographic study examines the pedagogical and practical implications of deliveri... more This two-phase ethnographic study examines the pedagogical and practical implications of delivering student feedback via the GradeMark tool in Turnitin®. The first phase involved a small number of lecturers using various functions in GradeMark and reporting on their experience; the second phase aimed to stimulate use of the tool in the Creative Writing department by offering extra marking pay to part-time lecturers. During both phases of the project researchers interviewed staff and students about the pedagogical and practical advantages and problems of using GradeMark, as well as recording their own experiences. Findings include a range of practical benefits, a small number of potential pedagogical benefits, and some potential problems with working conditions, health and safety, and access. The researchers conclude that the use of GradeMark does not necessarily improve feedback, though it may result in faster turn-around; the practical benefits are tempered by the potential health and safety and inclusion concerns.
Supporting the Academic Writing of Widening Participation Students
Teaching Documents by Joelle Adams
Postgraduate Certificate in Further and Higher Music Education
Teaching and Supporting Academic Writing in UK HE
Writing and Learning Centre Coordinator
Personal and Business Development
Academic Writing Development
Professional and Academic Development
Organizational Business Communication
Academic Staff Development
Talks by Joelle Adams
Feedback for Sustaining Professional Creative Practice
This presentation outlines the findings of recent research into evaluation of student work and pr... more This presentation outlines the findings of recent research into evaluation of student work and processes for giving feedback that encourages student learning and development. There is a close connection to student learning and experience with how they receive feedback on their work, particularly in the arts and humanities (Adams and McNab, 2013). Two recent projects in the UK, Transforming the Experience of Students Through Assessment (TESTA) and Feedback and Assessment for Students Using Technology (FASTECH), have highlighted the unique challenges of evaluation and feedback in professional creative subjects, including the impact of identity and these subjects' ''signature pedagogies'' (Shulman, 2005) on students' experiences and learning. The presentation will also include reflections on how the research tools may need to be developed to better reflect the unique contexts of creative professional subjects. The presentation will outline the findings of these projects and include recommendations for improving evaluation practices, with a particular focus on the part-time creative lecturer-practitioners often teaching these subjects and on helping students develop sustainable skills of self-assessment and professional behaviours in their fields. This session will be of particular interest to educational developers, course leaders, lecturers, and students involved in arts and humanities subjects, but may also interest anyone with responsibility for improving student experience and learning.
Adams, J. and McNab, N. (2013, forthcoming) ‘Understanding Arts and Humanities Students’ Experiences of Assessment and Feedback’ Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 12 (1).
Shulman, L. (2005) ‘Signature Pedagogies in the Professions’. Daedalus, 4 (3), pp. 52-59.
Session Learning Outcomes
By the end of this session, delegates will be able to:
• identify key ... more Session Learning Outcomes
By the end of this session, delegates will be able to:
• identify key issues in using electronic feedback systems
• consider solutions to barriers to electronic feedback
• reflect on implications of the session for their own professional practice
Session Outline
This session examines arguments for and against using tools such as GradeMark to provide and store student feedback. Using case studies from Bath Spa University, we will investigate possible barriers and objections to using electronic feedback, as well as suggest potential solutions and benefits.
Using tools and guidance resulting from the TESTA project (2010), this research first took an ethnographic approach to examining staff and students’ experiences of creating, distributing, analysing, and applying feedback on written assignments. Focus groups and questionnaire data from 10 3rd-year students and questionnaire and interview results from 10 members of staff highlighted potential problems with using the technology and identified attitudes about feedback.
Based on issues raised by staff and students, as well as findings from Hepplestone (2008), JISC (2010a and 2010b), and Siebert (2009) guidelines were created for lecturers and students using Turnitin’s GradeMark tool to provide and receive feedback on assessments. In addition to practical guidance, the advice to lecturers builds on Gibbs’ ‘principles of assessment’ (2010a) and guidance for effective feedback (2010b). Two lecturers used the approach over two terms; at the close of the academic year the research team will again ask staff and students about their experiences. The intended outcomes for the project include a set of guidelines for pedagogically-sound, efficient, and effective feedback processes using GradeMark; recommendations for further investigation; and technological support guidance.
Participants will be asked to contribute their arguments for and against using online tools for providing student feedback (both practical and pedagogical), devise strategies for breaking through barriers to ineffective feedback cycles, and consider the implications of both this and the TESTA project on their own professional practices.
Session Activities and Approximate Timings
10 minutes: Introduction to team and project
15 minutes: Small groups - participants discuss objections and consider solutions
10 minutes: Large group discussion about how to overcome barriers to e-feedback
5 minutes: Results of the project and next steps
5 minutes: Participant reflection – implications for practice
References
Gibbs, G. (2010a) Principles of Assessment. Testa Project Best Practice Guides. Available from: http://www.testa.ac.uk/resources/best-practice-guides.
Gibbs, G. (2010b) Feedback Guide for Lecturers. Test Project Best Practice Guides. Available from: http://www.testa.ac.uk/resources/best-practice-guides.
Hepplestone, S. (2008) ‘Masking marks: Encouraging student engagement with useful feedback’. HEA Resources. Available from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/events/annualconference/2008/Ann_conf_2008_Stuart_Hepplestone
JISC, (2010) Effective Assessment in a Digital Age. Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/programmerelated/2010/digiassess.aspx#downloads
JISC, (2010) Effective Practice with e-Assessment. Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearningpedagogy/assessment.aspx
Siebert, S. (2009) ‘Feedback on assessment via Gradebook (Electronic coursework submission system)’, Business, Management, Accountancy and Finance case study. HEA Resources. Available from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/business/projects/detail/trdg/2008-09/0809trdg_Sabina_Siebert_GLC
TESTA Project (2010) www.testa.ac.uk
Investigating Peer Tutoring for Academic Writing Support in a UK University
Jointly presented by the researcher and a peer tutor, this session outlines a peer tutoring schem... more Jointly presented by the researcher and a peer tutor, this session outlines a peer tutoring scheme recently piloted in the Study Skills Centre of a UK teaching-led university.
Writing development teachers and researchers in the UK have thus far been wary of simply importing peer tutoring models into the very different context of UK higher education. As recommended by Devet et al, this project takes into consideration the ‘curricular, pedagogical, and micro-political needs’ (2006: 211) of the UK context and a particular institution when contemplating the development of a peer tutoring initiative. The project also draws on other North American and UK literature, including Ivanič’s work on identity and academic writing (1998), Ryan and Zimmerelli’s peer tutoring handbook (2005), and Lea and Street’s academic literacies theory (1998).
The presenters will outline the pedagogical framework, rationale, training methods, and results of the pilot peer tutoring scheme, including the experience of the tutors themselves. This session will be of interest to UK academic writing teachers considering implementing a peer tutoring scheme, international delegates, and those interested in peer teaching and learning in general.
References
Devet, B. , Orr, S., Blythman, M., and Bishop, C. (2006) ‘Peering Across the Pond: the Role of Students in Developing Other Students’ Writing in the US and UK’. in Ganobcsik-Williams, L. Ed. (2006) Teaching Academic Writing in UK Higher Education: Theories, Practices, and Models. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 196-211.
Ivanič, R. (1998) Writing and Identity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lea, M. and Street, B. (1998). ‘Student writing in higher education: an academic literacies approach’. Studies in Higher Education, 11 (3), pp. 182-199.
Ryan, L. and Zimmerelli, L. (2006) The Bedford Guide for Writing Tutors 4th Ed. Boston: Bedford-St Martins.
Uploads
Papers by Joelle Adams
Teaching Documents by Joelle Adams
Talks by Joelle Adams
Adams, J. and McNab, N. (2013, forthcoming) ‘Understanding Arts and Humanities Students’ Experiences of Assessment and Feedback’ Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 12 (1).
Shulman, L. (2005) ‘Signature Pedagogies in the Professions’. Daedalus, 4 (3), pp. 52-59.
By the end of this session, delegates will be able to:
• identify key issues in using electronic feedback systems
• consider solutions to barriers to electronic feedback
• reflect on implications of the session for their own professional practice
Session Outline
This session examines arguments for and against using tools such as GradeMark to provide and store student feedback. Using case studies from Bath Spa University, we will investigate possible barriers and objections to using electronic feedback, as well as suggest potential solutions and benefits.
Using tools and guidance resulting from the TESTA project (2010), this research first took an ethnographic approach to examining staff and students’ experiences of creating, distributing, analysing, and applying feedback on written assignments. Focus groups and questionnaire data from 10 3rd-year students and questionnaire and interview results from 10 members of staff highlighted potential problems with using the technology and identified attitudes about feedback.
Based on issues raised by staff and students, as well as findings from Hepplestone (2008), JISC (2010a and 2010b), and Siebert (2009) guidelines were created for lecturers and students using Turnitin’s GradeMark tool to provide and receive feedback on assessments. In addition to practical guidance, the advice to lecturers builds on Gibbs’ ‘principles of assessment’ (2010a) and guidance for effective feedback (2010b). Two lecturers used the approach over two terms; at the close of the academic year the research team will again ask staff and students about their experiences. The intended outcomes for the project include a set of guidelines for pedagogically-sound, efficient, and effective feedback processes using GradeMark; recommendations for further investigation; and technological support guidance.
Participants will be asked to contribute their arguments for and against using online tools for providing student feedback (both practical and pedagogical), devise strategies for breaking through barriers to ineffective feedback cycles, and consider the implications of both this and the TESTA project on their own professional practices.
Session Activities and Approximate Timings
10 minutes: Introduction to team and project
15 minutes: Small groups - participants discuss objections and consider solutions
10 minutes: Large group discussion about how to overcome barriers to e-feedback
5 minutes: Results of the project and next steps
5 minutes: Participant reflection – implications for practice
References
Gibbs, G. (2010a) Principles of Assessment. Testa Project Best Practice Guides. Available from: http://www.testa.ac.uk/resources/best-practice-guides.
Gibbs, G. (2010b) Feedback Guide for Lecturers. Test Project Best Practice Guides. Available from: http://www.testa.ac.uk/resources/best-practice-guides.
Hepplestone, S. (2008) ‘Masking marks: Encouraging student engagement with useful feedback’. HEA Resources. Available from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/events/annualconference/2008/Ann_conf_2008_Stuart_Hepplestone
JISC, (2010) Effective Assessment in a Digital Age. Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/programmerelated/2010/digiassess.aspx#downloads
JISC, (2010) Effective Practice with e-Assessment. Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearningpedagogy/assessment.aspx
Siebert, S. (2009) ‘Feedback on assessment via Gradebook (Electronic coursework submission system)’, Business, Management, Accountancy and Finance case study. HEA Resources. Available from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/business/projects/detail/trdg/2008-09/0809trdg_Sabina_Siebert_GLC
TESTA Project (2010) www.testa.ac.uk
Writing development teachers and researchers in the UK have thus far been wary of simply importing peer tutoring models into the very different context of UK higher education. As recommended by Devet et al, this project takes into consideration the ‘curricular, pedagogical, and micro-political needs’ (2006: 211) of the UK context and a particular institution when contemplating the development of a peer tutoring initiative. The project also draws on other North American and UK literature, including Ivanič’s work on identity and academic writing (1998), Ryan and Zimmerelli’s peer tutoring handbook (2005), and Lea and Street’s academic literacies theory (1998).
The presenters will outline the pedagogical framework, rationale, training methods, and results of the pilot peer tutoring scheme, including the experience of the tutors themselves. This session will be of interest to UK academic writing teachers considering implementing a peer tutoring scheme, international delegates, and those interested in peer teaching and learning in general.
References
Devet, B. , Orr, S., Blythman, M., and Bishop, C. (2006) ‘Peering Across the Pond: the Role of Students in Developing Other Students’ Writing in the US and UK’. in Ganobcsik-Williams, L. Ed. (2006) Teaching Academic Writing in UK Higher Education: Theories, Practices, and Models. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 196-211.
Ivanič, R. (1998) Writing and Identity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lea, M. and Street, B. (1998). ‘Student writing in higher education: an academic literacies approach’. Studies in Higher Education, 11 (3), pp. 182-199.
Ryan, L. and Zimmerelli, L. (2006) The Bedford Guide for Writing Tutors 4th Ed. Boston: Bedford-St Martins.