oe
mor
PF

WY

 

VOLUME XVII, NUMBER 10

3 INNOVATION ABSTRACTS

PUBLISHED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STAFF AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (NISOD), COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, THE

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN « WITH SUPPORT FROM THE W. K. KELLOGG FOUNDATION AND THE SID W. RICHARDSON FOUNDATION

 

Computerized Feedback as a Resource in the Educational Process

One of my pet gripes during my college days was about
professors who would return term papers and essay tests
with only a grade and little or no comment. Even when
the grade was good, I did not know what they liked about
the paper and what criteria they had used to evaluate my
work. When the grade was not as good as I had hoped, I
had no idea what to focus on to improve my skills and
score. I thought that while teachers had many papers to
grade, they had a responsibility to provide feedback to
students in order to nurture real learning.

Later in my graduate and postgraduate training, I was
fortunate to work with several professors who wrote
insightful comments on essay tests and term papers. One
of my favorite wrote copious comments in a beautifully
crafted printing style. Through that medium he engaged
in a dialogue with his students, critiquing grammar and
style, and providing inspiration and deeper insight.

When I began my teaching career, I decided that I
wanted to emulate this professor’s approach to teaching,
but I soon discovered that my handwriting was not up to
his penmanship abilities. In college, my cursive efforts had
deteriorated to the point that I was encouraged by teachers
to bring a typewriter the day of tests and type my essays. I
attempted to solve the problem by printing, but that effort
was also hindered by a distinct lack of legibility.

Fall semester 1993 I devised a new approach—provid-
ing feedback to students on their papers and tests by using
a word processor. I could enter my comments on the hard
drive and then provide the students with a printout
critique of their work. I tested the idea in one section of
Western Civilization and got such positive feedback that I
implemented the procedure in my other classes and have
continued to use it.

Ihave found the approach to have many advantages. |
can type faster than I can write legibly, so the process saves
time. The feedback to students is presented in a neat and
professional manner. I can enter comments on the word
processor and then edit them, making sure that my critique
is clear, concise, and supportive. With a permanent record
of the critique and the grade, I have a copy of my com-
ments from which to respond to students’ questions.
Finally, the students can gain a clear understanding of
what I am looking for ina paper or on a test and why they
have received their grades.

AR
Wy

At the conclusion of last semester, I asked students to _
share some written comments about the approach. One *
student's observation is illustrative of the general tone of ea
all of the remarks. “I found it to be truly helpful. I wish all
teachers would provide this type of feedback. It helped me
understand why points were taken off, thus helping me
learn more. It also helped me in understanding what you
were looking for in my answers, thus helping me study for
the next test. I appreciate the work you put into this
process. I knew you did not simply scan the tests but spent
a great deal of time and thought on each one. When a
person has spent a great deal of time preparing for a test, it
is appreciated that the instructor also did so in the grading
process. Thanks!”

There is one word of caution: be careful about being too
critical and not providing some positive encouragement.
Perhaps this semester I was guilty of losing sight of this
maxim, which is evidenced by this student’s remarks: “I
really appreciated the fact that you actually took the time
to read and thoroughly analyze the papers. It was rather
difficult understanding exactly what you wanted us to do;
with the feedback I could learn what I could do to improve
on the paper. The only thing I found hindering about it
was the fact that I felt like I was always wrong, and I
couldn’t do anything right. It was very discouraging to
me. It also, though, helped me reanalyze my idea of good
work. Iam more critical of myself now and expect better
things from myself.” With a few more positive comments
on her paper, the same instructional goal could have been
achieved.

John C. Loucks, Chair, Humanities Division
For further information, contact the author at Seward

County Community College, Box 1137, Liberal, KS 67903-
1137.

THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STAFF AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (NISCD)
Community Coilege Leadership Program. Department of Educational Administration
College of Education, The University of Texas at Austin, SZB 348. Austin, Texas 78712