This section provides a brief introduction of the tool in question. This section provides a brief introduction of the tool in question. This section provides a brief introduction of the tool in question. This section provides a brief introduction of the tool in question.

Checklist for the tool
Heading
- Discuss the criteria with managers and pedagogical developers. 
- Undertake a comparability of the evaluation process. 
- Calibrate the evaluation by reviewing a few assignments before the actual assessment. 
Heading
- Review the assignment through the lens of each assessment criteria. 
- Search for evidence of the student’s level of achievement on each criteria. 
- Monitor and disarm your red marking. (For grammar + referencing errors ‐ edit once, then comment.) 
Heading
- Provide clear and precise feedback, avoid vague judgemental terms that don’t describe the 
 qualities of the student’s work or the standard (e.g excellent, good work, poor).
- Criterion referenced: Provide specific, relevant information on the students’ level of 
 performance in relation to the standard.
- Avoid focus on grades which can increase compliance and 
 reduce students’ autonomy, risk taking and learning.
- Focus on two or three key areas for improvement (rather than every error). 
- Feedforward: Provide advice, strategies or resources students can use to improve their performance. 
Heading
- Acknowledge individual quality of the work. 
- Acknowledge effort and attempt. 
- Ajust the feedback to suit student’s level of achievement. 
- Take into consideration the student’s special circumstances when aware and reasonable. 
- For large groups create a feedback template, use standard comments but modify as appropriate for each student. 
Source information
