I've been working my way through the learning journals. For some people I have no worries about their ability to do a good job with the summative learning journal. However, I have also noticed that some class members are still providing feedback like this:
I really enjoyed reading your learning journal and loved how you related to your life experience with the theory from the reading. I t clrearly shows that you have fully understoond the reading and able to utilise the theory. I also loved how you continuously gave your thought eg "i think".
I struggle to see how this meets the minimum requirements for providing feedback. In someways, if folk want to bilk in giving feedback that's okay by me. In other ways, it seems unfair to the person receiving the feedback; and that I care about a lot. As ~rdev392 suggests, perhaps feedback should be more explicitly tied to 'rewards' (aka) grades. And so, I think it is necessary to change things up.
- For this semester, I have clarified the guidelines regarding giving feedback. I will be going through everyone's feedback (i.e., those due on the 16 September and onward ) at the end of the course to assess it. As the guidelines state, each piece of inadequate feedback will incur a five percent penalty being applied to the summative learning journal. If you have the slightest concern that your feedback is 'not up to scratch', then you should (a) read the guidelines, (b) review the guidelines for week five's peer reviews, and then — if you still have doubts — arrange to talk to me.
- For future semesters, I will see about implementing a scheme whereby students will reward/grade/rate the feedback from their peers.
I thought I had addressed this earlier on in the semester. Clearly, I wasn't as effective as I expected. Let's see what effect this has.