Annotation is a valuable tool to enhance learning and assessment in student essays
Ball, E, Franks , H, Jenkins, J, Mcgrath, ML and Leigh, JA 2009, 'Annotation is a valuable tool to enhance learning and assessment in student essays' , Nurse Education Today, 29 (3) , pp. 284-291.
|PDF - Published Version |
Restricted to Repository staff only
Download (295kB) | Request a copy
As a United Kingdom (UK) wide organisation, the Quality Assurance Agencies ensure that best standards in higher education are reached. Following an institutional audit within a UK University, it was recommended that annotation be introduced to promote good practice in the management and implementation of giving feedback to students on assessed work. Annotation is a comment or mark written directly onto the page of the students’ script. Methods: A review of current literature, policy and practice in relation to annotation. Random sample of student scripts analysed for versions of annotation such as content, difference, length, approach and clarity. Questionnaires distributed to staff (n=74) and students n=249), analysed using SPSS and thematic analysis. Outcomes: For both staff and students, interpretations of annotation in terms of transparency of style and legibility were an issue. Both respondents agreed or strongly agreed that annotation enhances a student-centered approach to learning. For the student sample, there was agreement or strong agreement that annotation helped inform the next assignment (82.2%). There was a recognition that annotation can convey a tone and the student survey indicated that the tone of some annotation undermines confidence. Findings show annotation is considered important by students but is different from other forms of feedback. Because annotation is written on the page it requires greater sensitivity towards students’ work. Recommendations disseminate findings to develop health professional education. Discussion: The annotator’s presence can influence the student’s interaction with their script causing them to evaluate their original writing differently. Ramage and Bean (1995) use two different annotated versions of the same essay to model and contrast “reading as a believer” and “reading as a doubter” (cited in Wolfe 2002). Multiple readings can be made of one text, but how the essay is read by the lecturer has the greater impact on the student. Annotation defies any stable definition precisely because it can be practiced in so many ways. It is vital that annotation is used and received appropriately so that negative effects of annotation are minimised and the positive effects emphasised. There are a number of ways of improving annotation, and good practice guidelines are offered in the conclusion to this paper.
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||Annotation; student feedback; good practice guidelines|
|Themes:||Subjects / Themes > R Medicine > RT Nursing|
Subjects / Themes > P Language and Literature > P Philology. Linguistics
Subjects / Themes > L Education > L Education (General)
Health and Wellbeing
Memory, Text and Place
Subjects outside of the University Themes
|Schools:||Colleges and Schools > College of Health & Social Care|
Colleges and Schools > College of Health & Social Care > School of Nursing, Midwifery, Social Work & Social Sciences
|Journal or Publication Title:||Nurse Education Today|
|Depositing User:||Dr Elaine Ball|
|Date Deposited:||21 Jul 2010 13:46|
|Last Modified:||20 Aug 2013 17:19|
|References:||Askoxford.com. oxforddictionarys. 2008 annotation. [online] Available at: http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/annotate?view=uk [Accessed 29 November 2008] Ball, E., (in press). Annotation An Effective Device For Student Feedback: a critical review of the literature. Nurse Education in Practice Ball, E., (in press). A participatory action research study on annotation and its impact on staff and students. Systemic Practice and Action Research Barbour, R., Kitzinger, J., 1998. Developing Focus Group Research: Politics, Theory & Practice London: Sage Brown, G., Bull, J., Pendlebury, M., 1997. Assessing student learning in higher education London: Kogan Page Cook, D. A., 2005, The Research We Still Are Not Doing: An Agenda for the Study of Computer-Based Learning. Academic Medicine 80(6) 541 Crook, C., Gross, H and Dymott, R., 2006. Assessment relationships in higher education: the tension of process and practice. British Educational Research Journal. 32 (1). pp. 95-114 Denton, P., Madden, J., Roberts, M., Rowe, P,. 2008. Students' Response to Traditional and Computer-Assisted Formative Feedback: A Comparative Case Study British Journal of Educational Technology. 39(3) 486-500 Derrida, J., 1982. Margins of Philosophy Translation and Annotation. (Ed., Alan Bass). Brighton: Harvester Press, 1982 Diyanni, R., 2002. One Hundred Great Essays. New York, Addison-Wesley Guba, E. G., Lincoln, Y. S., 1994. Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds). Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage Harrison, N., 2006. The impact of negative experiences, dissatisfaction and attachment on first year undergraduate withdrawal. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 30(4), 377-391 Higgins, L., 1993. Reading to Argue: Helping Students Transform Source Texts, in Hearing ourselves think: cognitive research in the college writing classroom. A.M., Penrose and B.M. Sitco, Eds. Buckingham, OUP. 70-101 Jenkins, J. (2005) ‘ Policy On Provision of Feedback On Assessed Work,’ School of Nursing, University of Salford. K: \School of Nursing\New Structure-Nursing Filestore\Quality\School Policies\Feedback\2005\Plociy on the Provision of Feedback on Assessed Work 7/doc Jewitt, C and Kress, G., 2005. English in classrooms: only write down what you need to know: annotation for what? English in Education. 39, 1, 5-18 Lamont, C., 1997. Annotating a Text: Literary Theory and Electronic Hypertext, in K. Sutherland (Ed.). Electronic Text: Investigations in Method and Theory. Oxford, Clarendon press Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., 2008. Feedback on assessment: students' perceptions of quality and effectiveness. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 33(3), 263-275 Liu, K., 2006. Annotation As An Index To Critical Writing. Urban Education. 41: 192-207 Marshall, C. M., 1998. Toward an ecology of hypertext annotation. Hypertext. Proceedings of the ninth ACM conference on Hypertext and hypermedia June 20-24. Pittsburgh Pennsylvania, US. 40-49 McColly W., 1965. The Dimensions of Composition Annotation Oswego. New York, State University of New York Nesbit, P and Burton, S., 2006. Student justice perceptions following assignment feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 31:6, 655-670 Polit, D., Beck, C. T., 2006. Essentials of Nursing Research. (6th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincot Williams & Wilkins Poulos, A., Mahony, M. J., 2008. Effectiveness of feedback: the students’ perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 33(2), 143–154 Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 2004. Institutional Audit Report Main Report QAA for Higher Education Gloucester Section 3: The audit investigations: Discipline audit trails. Gloucester: Linney Ramage, J. D., and Bean, J. C., 1995. Writing Arguments (3rd ed.) Needham Heights MA: Allyn and Bacon Stephani, L., 2005. Assessment of Student Learning: promoting a scholarly approach. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Issue 1, 51-66 Storch N & Tapper J 1997. Student Annotations: What NNS and NS University Students Say About Their Own Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. 6(3): 245 - 265 Sutherland, K., 1997. Electronic Text: Investigations in Method and Theory. Oxford, Clarendon press Tang, M., 2007. Regular versus online versus blended: A qualitative description of the advantages of the electronic modes and a quantitative evaluation. International journal on e-learning 6(2) 257 -266. Urquhart, V McIver, M., 2005. Teaching Writing in the Content Areas. In Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning Weaver, M. R., 2006. Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. Vol. 31: 3, 379-394 Wolfe, J. L., 2002. Marginal Pedagogy: How Annotated Texts Affects Writing-From-Source Text. Written Communication 19, 2, 297-333 Wolfe, J. L., Nuewirth, C. M., 2001. From the Margins to the Centre: the future of annotation. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 15(3) 333-371 Wolfe, J. L., 2000. Effects of Annotations on Student Readers and Writers. Proceedings of the Fifth ACM Conference on Digital Libraries San Antonio: ACM Press Yang, S. J. H., Chen, I.Y.L., and Shao, N., 2004. Ontology Enabled Annotation and Knowledge Management for Collaborative Learning in Virtual Learning Community. Educational Technology & Society. 7:4, 70-81 Young, P., 2000. “I might as well give up”: self-esteem and mature students’ feelings about feedback on assignments. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 24:3, 409-418|
Document DownloadsMore statistics for this item...
Actions (login required)
|Edit record (repository staff only)|