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.

Process for inclusive evaluation and feedback

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