Monash University, Nursing and Midwifery, Australia.
Monash University, Nursing and Midwifery, Australia; Monash Centre for Scholarship in Health Education (MCSHE), Australia.
Nurse Educ Today. 2019 Dec;83:104193. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2019.08.011. Epub 2019 Aug 24.
Traditionally, feedback on written work is unidirectional, with academics feeding back to students. This project aimed to establish bi-directional feedback between the student and academics through a process of self-assessment.
To improve the process of student-centered feedback by including a self-assessment component to an assessment task.
A two-phased, mixed methods explanatory sequential approach was used.
Students were enrolled across two campuses at a large university in Victoria, Australia.
The Phase One sample consisted of all students enrolled in Year One and Year Three of the Bachelor of Nursing. There were 484 students enrolled in Year One, and 419 students enrolled in Year Three. Some students elected not to complete the self-assessment rubric, and those students were removed from the sample. This left 430 Year One, and 324 Year Three assessments in the sample. Convenience sampling was used in Phase Two to collect qualitative data via semi-structured focus groups from students in years One and Three.
Quantitative data of student-assessed and academic-assessed marks were entered by a research assistant and then analysed using SPSS. Qualitative data were collected from a semi-structured interview and focus group with Year One and Year Three students. Qualitative data were then thematically analysed.
Year One students were closer at estimating their own grade (M = 3.60; SD = 11.94) than Year Three students (M = 6.47; SD = 12.81). Students often underestimated their grade to see if the marker would match it or provide them with a higher grade. Year One students have trouble finding and utilising evidence while Year Three students cite this as a strength. When students engaged with the process, their self-review of work enabled them to improve the work prior to submission, and academic feedback was more meaningful. However, many students lacked trust in the process, and instead opted to 'game the system', hoping to hide flaws in their work, or draw extra marks from an academic by marking their own work down.
传统上，书面作业的反馈是单向的，由学者向学生反馈。本项目旨在通过自我评估过程在学生和学者之间建立双向反馈。
通过在评估任务中纳入自我评估部分来改进以学生为中心的反馈过程。
采用两阶段、混合方法解释性顺序方法。
学生在澳大利亚维多利亚州的一个大型大学校园的两个校区就读。
第一阶段的样本包括在护理学士一年级和三年级就读的所有学生。一年级有 484 名学生，三年级有 419 名学生。一些学生选择不完成自我评估量表，这些学生被从样本中删除。这使得一年级有 430 项评估，三年级有 324 项评估。在第二阶段，使用方便抽样从一年级和三年级的学生中通过半结构化焦点小组收集定性数据。
研究助理输入学生评估和学术评估分数的定量数据，然后使用 SPSS 进行分析。定性数据是通过对一年级和三年级学生进行半结构化访谈和焦点小组收集的。然后对定性数据进行主题分析。
一年级学生更接近估计自己的成绩（M=3.60；SD=11.94），而三年级学生（M=6.47；SD=12.81）。学生经常低估自己的成绩，看看评分者是否会与之匹配，或者给他们更高的成绩。一年级学生在寻找和利用证据方面有困难，而三年级学生则将此作为优势。当学生参与这个过程时，他们对工作的自我审查使他们能够在提交前改进工作，并且学术反馈更有意义。然而，许多学生对这个过程缺乏信任，而是选择“操纵系统”，希望隐藏工作中的缺陷，或者通过给他们自己的工作打低分从学术人员那里获得额外的分数。
