Loughborough University
Browse
Feedback Evaluation (Publication Version) A&EinHE.pdf (131.38 kB)

What if best practice is too expensive? Feedback on oral presentations and efficient use of resources

Download (131.38 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2015-12-07, 11:50 authored by Lawrence Leger, Karligash GlassKarligash Glass, Paraskevi Katsiampa, Shibo Liu, Kavita SirichandKavita Sirichand
We evaluate feedback methods for oral presentations used in training non-quantitative research skills (literature review and various associated tasks). Training is provided through a credit-bearing module taught to MSc students of banking, economics and finance in the UK. Monitoring oral presentations and providing ‘best practice’ feedback is very resource-intensive. Do we withdraw oral presentations from the module, because best feedback practice is prohibitively expensive in a world of limited resources, or choose a second-best alternative? To what extent might the latter compromise intended learning outcomes? We used the same provision of video feedback for all students but used two verbal feedback regimes. For one regime, we decreased the amount of verbal feedback and increased the number of presentations. The impact was measured by academic outcome, rating scales and questionnaire. Overall satisfaction with the module was very high for both feedback regimes, and there were no statistically significant differences between regimes, suggesting that less resource-intensive methods need not compromise learning outcomes.

History

School

  • Business and Economics

Department

  • Business

Published in

Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education

Pages

1 - 18

Citation

LEGER, L.A. ...et al., 2015. What if best practice is too expensive? Feedback on oral presentations and efficient use of resources. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42 (3), pp. 329-346.

Publisher

© Taylor & Francis

Version

  • AM (Accepted Manuscript)

Publisher statement

This work is made available according to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Publication date

2015

Notes

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education on 19th November 2015, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/02602938.2015.1109054.

ISSN

0260-2938

eISSN

1469-297X

Language

  • en