An Overview of the Current UK Institutional Use of Online Submission,

Marking and Feedback

Dr Barbara Newland, Brighton

Lindsay Martin, Edge Hill

Alice Bird, Liverpool John Moores

To identify current practice with regard to eSubmission, eMarking and eFeedback in UK HE

To gain a snapshot of the strategic overview identifying key issues relating to assessment regulations and academic attitudes

Aim

The term eSubmission is used very widely to cover a range of activities so the following definitions were used:

Definitions

eSubmission online submission of an assignment

eMarking marking online ie not paper

eFeedback producing online feedback which could be text, audio etc but not paper

eReturn online return of marks

A network of senior staff in institutions engaged in promoting, supporting and developing technology enhanced learning

Over 125 nominated Heads from UK Higher Education institutions

A regular programme of well attended events

Represents the interests of its members to various national bodies and agencies including the Higher Education Academy and JISCwww.helf.ac.uk

Heads of eLearning Forum (HeLF)

The survey was available to HeLF members who were asked to respond with regard to their knowledge of their own institution.

The survey was available in March 2012 and took about 10 minutes to complete

The questions were a mixture of closed multiple-choice and multiple selection as well as open response type

Participants were assured that all data collected in the survey would be held anonymously and securely

No personal data was asked for or retained unless the participant indicated a willingness to participate in the follow-up activity

The results are being analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods

Methodology

44 responses from HeLF members

35% response rate

Results

Institution-wide policy

Yes No Don't know0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

eSubmissioneFeedback with eMarkingeFeedback without eMarking

Current practice

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

University-wideSome department-wideIndividual academics only

Regulations for eSubmission

Within institutional assessment regula-tionsSeparate regulationsNot yet been consideredDon't know

Training for academics

Optional Optional and strongly encouraged by some departments Optional and strongly encouraged across the institution Compulsory where adopted by de-partments Compulsory where adopted institution-wide

Does your institution recommend particular software?

Turn

itin

(sta

nd-a

lone

)

Turn

itin

(inte

grat

ed in

to V

LE)

VLE

Home

grow

n

Other

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

eSubmission of texteFeedback of text

Marks automatically fed back from VLE to student record system?

YesNoUnder consideration

Who is driving eSubmission adoption?

Seni

or m

anag

emen

t

Head

of Fac

ulty

/Sch

ool

Acade

mics

Admin

istra

tors

Lear

ning

tech

nolo

gist

s

Stud

ents

Nobod

y0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Academic staff attitudes

Positive Negative Don't know0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

eSubmissioneFeedback with eMarkingeFeedback without eMarking

Administrative staff attitudes

Positive Negative Don't know0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

eSubmissioneFeedback with eMarkingeFeedback without eMarking

Student attitudes

Positive Negative Don't know0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

eSubmissioneFeedback with eMarkingeFeedback without eMarking

We do not currently have any policy in place

therefore practice across the institution is

varied

Communications with staff and students

Staff resistance to feeling institution

coercing them into online marking

Academic engagement with

training

Turnitin which is proving less than

reliable...

Health and safety

Regulations Policy Guidelin

esSupport

Implementation Plan

Communication

Responsibilities

Monitoring

Risks Technology

Health and safety

Resourcing – support staff

Attitudes of academics,

administrators, students

Quality assurance ..

Challenges – building blocks

“Cost reduction associated with centralised printing plus reduced administrative time spent sorting student submissions”

“Higher student satisfaction in assessment and feedback as measured through the NSS and internal student surveys.”

“There is also some preliminary evidence that students value electronic feedback, in both text and audio formats.”

“Positive experiences of the academics”

Real impact/benefit observed within your institution

“Has worked well with Collaborative partners in different countries and students working on courses at a distance.”

“Research undertaken with students at the institution illustrate that students are more likely to engage with and make use of electronic forms of feedback.”

“Reduction in plagiarism in some schools”

“Nearly 700 assignments submitted during our closure time over Christmas”

Real impact/benefit observed within your institution

Large scale change of a complicated process and embedded practice - patchy to rolling out

Focus is more on efficiency than pedagogy

Heads of eLearning understand the benefits and challenges

Conclusion

Would an eSubmission SIG be useful?

b.a.newland@brighton.ac.uk www.slideshare.net/barbaranewland

Question

http://www.yorksj.ac.uk/technology-enhanced-learning/technology-enhanced-learning/moodle/e-submission.aspx

  http://www.bradford.ac.uk/elearning/e-SubmissionOptions/page_01.htm

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/isd/staff/e-learning/tools/turnitin

http://turnitin.wetpaint.com/

http://staffcentral.brighton.ac.uk/plagiarism/esubmission.shtm

http://ltss.beds.ac.uk/breo_help/staff_help/sta_019.html

http://www.lancs.ac.uk/celt/celtweb/files/LUVLEStaffGuide0910.pdf starting on p 35

http://hermes.uwl.ac.uk/vle_staff_support/index.asp?toolkitID=100&sectionID=120&topicID=First&pageNo=1

http://www.gold.ac.uk/warden/smt-pw-students/

www.derby.ac.uk/esubmission - staff sitewww.derby.ac.uk/esub - student site

Policy, guidelines and/or training/support materials