Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Saggi e ricerche

2021: Special Issue - Faculty Development e Digital Scholarship: questioni di ricerca nell’istruzione superiore

Innovating undergraduate teaching with ongoing formative feedback

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/exioa0-2021oa11129
Submitted
gennaio 25, 2021
Published
2021-01-25

Abstract

This paper presents an undergraduate teaching redesign that aims to integrate the learning strategies supported by digital media. The traditional elements of the teaching-learning process (lecture, study, examination) have been transformed through students’ ongoing involvement to ensure formative feedback throughout teaching development. To this end, social annotation and peer- and self-assessment practices have been introduced using two online environments: Perusall and Peergrade. The functionalities and the use in the higher education context of the two tools are presented. The contribution ends with research conducted on the application of the proposed redesign to an undergraduate teaching.

References

  1. Armstrong, L. (2016). Barriers to innovation and change in higher education. New York: TIAA-CREF Institute.
  2. Berry, T., Cook, L., Hill, N., & Stevens, K. (2010). An exploratory analysis of text-book usage and study habits: Misperceptions and barriers to success. College Teaching, 59(1), 31-39.
  3. Biggs, J.B., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. Buckingham: Open University Press/McGraw Hill.
  4. Burchfield, C.M., & Sappington, J. (2000). Compliance with required reading assignments. Teaching of Psychology, 27(1), 58-60.
  5. Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in university assessment: Learning from award-winning practice. London: Routledge.
  6. Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in higher education, 36(4), 395-407.
  7. Cecchinato, G., & Foschi, L.C. (2018). Involving students in teaching: analysis of an educational innovation pathway at University. Form@re – Open Journal per la formazione in rete, 18(1), 97-110.
  8. Cecchinato, G., & Foschi, L.C. (2019). Assessment Skills and Validity of Peer-and Self-Assessment in In-Service Teacher Training. In J. Theo Bastiaens (Ed.), Proceedings of EdMedia + Innovate Learning (pp. 86-91). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Recuperato da: https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/209993/.
  9. Cecchinato, G., & Foschi, L.C. (2020a). Perusall: University learning - teaching innovation employing social annotation and machine learning., QWERTY, 15(2), 45-67.
  10. Cecchinato, G., & Foschi, L.C. (2020b). Learning-Teaching Innovation of a University E-learning Course. 19th European Conference on e-Learning 29-30 October 2020, Berlin, Germany (ECEL).
  11. Cecchinato, G. & Foschi, L. C. (2020c). Perusall: un’analisi della validità dei processi valutativi basati sul Machine Learning. In G. Cecchinato & V. Grion (Eds.). Proceedings of Conference Dalle Teaching Machines al Machine Learning (pp. 21-28). Padova, Italy: Padova University Press.
  12. Cecchinato, G., & Papa, R. (2020). Insegnare nella società della conoscenza: analisi del processo di innovazione didattica di un insegnamento universitario. Proceedings of Conference SIRD, SIREM, SIPES, SIEMeS. Le società per la società: ricerca, scenari, emergenze. 2019. Roma.
  13. Cecchinato, G., Papa, R., & Foschi, L.C. (2019). Bringing game elements to the classroom: The role of challenge and technology. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(2), 158-173.
  14. Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2011). Learning by reviewing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 73-84.
  15. Foschi, L.C., & Cecchinato, G. (2019). Validity and reliability of peer-grading in in-service teacher training. Italian Journal of Educational research, 177-194.
  16. Gao, F., Zhang, T., & Franklin, T. (2013). Designing asynchronous online discussion environments: Recent progress and possible future directions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 469-483.
  17. Gee, J. P. (2013). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 1(1), 20-20.
  18. Grion, V., Serbati, A., & Nicol, D. (2019). Technologies as assessment change agents. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(1), 3-4.
  19. Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY, USA: Routledge.
  20. Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century (p. 145). Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
  21. Johnson, T.E., Archibald, T. N., & Tenenbaum, G. (2010). Individual and team annotation effects on students’ reading comprehension, critical thinking, and meta-cognitive skills. Computers in human behavior, 26(6), 1496-1507.
  22. Jonassen, D.H. (2008). Instructional design as design problem solving: An iterative process. Educational Technology, 48(3) 21-26.
  23. Kalir, J., Morales, E., Fleerackers, A., & Alperin, J. P. (2020). When I saw my peers annotating: Student perceptions of social annotation for learning in multiple courses. Journal of Information and Learning Sciences.
  24. Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (1998). Online social interchange, discord, and knowledge construction. Journal of Distance Education, 13(1). Recuperato da: https://auspace.athabascau.ca/bitstream/handle/2149/717/Online%20Social%20Inter-chang,%20Discord,%20and%20Knowledge%20Construction.pdf?sequence=1.
  25. Kelly, G.E. (2012). Lecture attendance rates at university and related factors. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 36(1), 17-40.
  26. Kottasz, R. (2005). Reasons for student non-attendance at lectures and tutorials: an analysis. Investigations in university teaching and learning, 2(2), 5-16.
  27. Li, S.C., Pow, J.W.C., Cheung, W.C. (2015). A delineation of the cognitive processes manifested in a social annotation environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(1), 1-13.
  28. Lowenthal, P.R. (2010). Social presence. In Social computing: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 129-136). IGI Global.
  29. Larkin-Hein, T. (2001). On-line discussions: a key to enhancing student motivation and understanding? Frontiers in education conference, 2001. 31st annual. Vol. 2. (pp. F2G-6). IEEE.
  30. Marshall, C.C. (1997). Annotation: From paper books to the digital library.
  31. Massingham, P., & Herrington, T. (2006). Does attendance matter? An examination of student attitudes, participation, performance and attendance. Journal of university teaching & learning practice, 3(2), 82-103.
  32. Mazzolini, M., Maddison, S. (2003). Sage, guide or ghost? The effect of instructor intervention on student participation in on-line discussion forums. Computers & Education, 40(3), 237-253.
  33. McAleese, M., Bladh, A., Berger, V., Bode, C., Muehlfeit, J., Petrin, T., ... & Tsoukalis, L. (2013). Report to the European Commission on Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions. Luxembourg: Publi-cation Office of the European Union.
  34. Miller, K., Lukoff, B., King, G., & Mazur, E. (2018). Use of a Social Annotation Platform for Pre-class reading assignments in a Flipped introductory Physics class. Frontiers in Education, 3(8), 1-12.
  35. Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501-517.
  36. Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122.
  37. Nokelainen, P., Kurhila, J., Miettinen, M., Floreen, P., & Tirri, H. (2003). Evaluating the role of a shared document-based annotation tool in learner-centered collaborative learning. Paper presented at the Advanced Learning Technologies. The 3rd IEEE International Conference.
  38. Nokelainen, P., Miettinen, M., Kurhila, J., Floréen, P., & Tirri, H. (2005). A shared document-based annotation tool to support learner-centered collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 757-770.
  39. Nonis, S.A., & Hudson, G.I. (2006). Academic performance of college students: Influence of time spent studying and working. Journal of education for business, 81(3), 151-159.
  40. Price, M., Handley, K., & Millar, J. (2011). Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education, 36(8), 879-896.
  41. Romero, C., López, M.I., Luna, J.M., & Ventura, S. (2013). Predicting students’ final performance from participation in on-line discussion forums. Computers & Education, 68(C), 458-472.
  42. Rovai, A.P. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 3(1).
  43. Skinner, E.A., & Belmont, M.J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of educational psychology, 85(4), 571.
  44. Sun, Y., & Gao, F. (2017). Comparing the use of a Social annotation tool and a threaded discussion forum to support online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education, 32, 72-79.
  45. Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000). Building knowledge building communities: Consistency, contact and communication in the virtual classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(4), 359-384.
  46. Thomas, M.J. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: The space of on-line discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(3), 351-366.
  47. Unsworth, J. (2000). Scholarly primitives: What methods do humanities researchers have in common, and how might our tools reflect this. Symposium on Humanities Computing: Formal Methods, Experimental Practice. King’s College, London. 13, 5-00.
  48. Yang, X., Yu, S., & Sun, Z. (2013). The effect of collaborative annotation on Chinese reading level in primary schools in China. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), 95-111.
  49. Zhu, X., Chen, B., Avadhanam, R.M., Shui, H., & Zhang, R.Z. (2020). Reading and connecting: using social annotation in online classes. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(5-6), 261-271.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...