A comparison of student and staff perceptions and feelings about assessment and feedback using cartoon annotation

Abstract

Evidence suggests that many higher education institutions have difficulty in managing student expectations around assessment and feedback, particularly on the clarity of criteria and the fairness of outcomes. Because of its importance students also have strong emotions linked to the process, as do those who teach them. This research sought to explore how students and staff think and feel about assessment and feedback and the implications for assessment literacy. It adopted an interpretive methodology, using qualitative data from focus group interviews combined with an innovative technique of using cartoon illustrations, which were annotated by participants. The results revealed the wide range of emotions associated with assessment and feedback amongst both students and staff. Most emotions were negative. Students feel uncertain about the tasks set. The data also revealed a lack of dialogue between students and staff, with staff often actively avoiding it for fear of conflict. An underlying issue seemed to be that students did not understand many of the backroom processes and roles related to assessment and feedback, partly because of obscure terminology such as ‘moderation’ and ‘unfair means’. This points to deficits in assessment literacy, but the extent of existing staff emotional labour suggests that a literacy lens is inadequate in itself and we should consider the role of wider structures in creating failures of dialogue. The innovative cartoon annotation method was successful in bringing out aspects of both the emotional and cognitive experience of assessment, including hidden assumptions.