# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Marking. To some, the bane of their life. To others with a fetish for highlighters, the colour green and stickers, a weird kind of joy.

It's well-established that effective feedback is one of the biggest drivers in increasing student achievement. This fact has inspired the establishment of an wing of educationalists who spend time coming up with novel ways of increasing the importance and quality of marking.

Written feedback and student responses to it has become the holy grail of school improvement. This clamour has resulted in tracts of ideas and policies: green pens instead of red to ensure the feelings of sensitive students weren't hurt, two ticks and a wish, feedback boxes, definable targets, highlighting errors and in recent years, ensuring students respond to written feedback. The latter resulting in the rather amusing phrase "triple marking", sometimes resulting in students drawing smiley faces next to the words "great work" and teachers spending a fair proportion of their working lives playing a word game resembling Consequences. As a result of all this, "work scrutiny" has superseded the "one-off lesson observation" as the primary means of evidence gathering in schools.
Time-consuming and life-sapping
So what's the problem with all this? Most significantly, written feedback only maintains its effectiveness when it is high-quality. How specific, immediate and measured it is, along with how learners respond to it, have been cited by researchers like Hattie as crucial factors. Most teachers are fully aware of this. However, putting the guidance into practice can be an uncompromisingly time-consuming and life-sapping process.

By reasonable estimates, one high-quality formative comment could take up to one minute to compose. So, for just one meaningful comment on one piece of work for one class set, you are looking at a time frame of at least 35 minutes. To enable further comments, a concentrated reading of the student's work needs to take place, so throw in anywhere between one minute and five minutes per book for that. We are now up to anywhere between one and three hours for one set of books. That's without marking for literacy and responding to previous student comments. For an English teacher with a full teaching allocation at secondary level, you might be looking at a ballpark figure of between 15 and 30 hours of marking and assessment over a two-week period based on a full timetable. So let's call that in the region of three 9-5 working days to find from somewhere, every two weeks.

So, in response to this reality, the majority of teachers who want some semblance of a life will do one of two things. The first is to not write anything on large tracts of student work and then write something more extensive on a particular assessed piece, say at the end of a half-term. The second is to "mark lite"; to write something that is sometimes more superficial on everything. It's debatable how much impact either of these approaches actually has. The research that has been done presumes that high-quality, written feedback is being given consistently and frequently, and that students are responding to that feedback with a religious regularity. However, if it's not, how much impact is it all having?

This is not a debate about whether written feedback is effective, because like any other feedback form, it can be. This is a recognition that because of the intense time pressure on the standard class teacher, written feedback might not be anywhere near as effective, meaningful or impactful as it could and should be. So, with this in mind, there is a very strong counter-argument.

It revolves around the use of time. Take that same English teacher. If you took those 15-30 hours and said; "use it to plan lessons, create resources, read around your subject and get a good night's sleep", what impact might that have on student progress and therefore attainment? On teacher wellbeing and therefore retention? Even on student engagement in lessons and therefore behaviour? Written feedback would be predominantly replaced by verbal feedback, along with a much more prominent role for self- and peer- assessment. Only the essentials like mock exams would be "marked" in the traditional sense of the word.

It is my view that through this approach, the quality of lesson planning and lesson delivery would go up. Does that then lead to the presumption that student outcomes would go up, too?
Radical minimal feedback policy
The problem is, we don't know what impact this change could have. We have no idea. Why? Because no one's tried a radical, minimal written feedback policy over time and perhaps one of the key reasons for that, apart from a sincere belief in the fundamental goodness of written feedback, is the intense pressure to evidence everything in some way, shape or form. So, when the inspectorate arrives at the school gates, there is something to show them. Exercise books are awful handy here. Work scrutiny has seemingly replaced the lesson observation as the chief calling card when backing up assertions about teaching and learning standards. Despite their differences, these two measuring methods have some commonalities, chiefly the fact that both are based on interpretation and both require judgement to be made. Both have pitched unfortunate senior leaders against furious teachers and unions against headteachers.

However, it carries on, because every school leader knows that it's impossible to quantify any tiny nuances in a young person's ethical or moral code that have come about as a result of an educational establishments work. There is no way to "spreadsheet" that. It's useless for the sake of evidence. Does this also explain why verbal feedback doesn't get quite the same attention as its written equivalent within education?

The ironic thing is, if a minimisation of all written feedback was school policy and exam results were incredible, then that school would be hailed outstanding, innovative and a trend-setter. But headteachers know that if that same experiment yielded some kind of temporary trough or downturn, and they didn't have a "portfolio of proof" to present, the guillotine would fall. A deep vault full of bits of paper has become an essential Alamo for the under fire leadership team, such is the complete lunacy that this "results business" has yielded.

Is it time to re-evaluate the place of written feedback within education? Is it time to look at the proportion of time it takes versus the impact it has? Is it time for schools to perform some radical experiments, whether the government supports them or not? Teachers are starting to ask the question openly.

Food for thought at the very least.
Tom Rogers tweets as @RogersHistory and runs rogershistory.com Do you agree? Join the debate on TES Community. Want to keep up with the latest education news and opinion? Follow TES on Twitter and like TES on Facebook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'To do marking and feedback right takes three days for every fortnight of teaching. There is another way'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Marking. To some, the bane of their life. To others with a fetish for highlighters, the colour green and stickers, a weird kind of joy. It's well-established that effective feedback is one of the biggest drivers in increasing student achievement.

# data[].attributes.body
A great article - students are "likely to compare their marks with other students, and either feel good about themselves or disheartened. What about the comments diligently made by the teacher in order for the student to improve?......these constructive comments are often ignored and regularly go without any action on the part of the student"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We teachers spend hours and hours marking pupils' work, only to hand all that rich data back to students. What do we hope students will do with the marking?

They are likely to compare their marks with other students, and either feel good about themselves or disheartened. What about the comments diligently made by the teacher in order for the student to improve?

In reality, no matter what your lead team have asked you to do in their marking policy, these constructive comments are often ignored and regularly go without any action on the part of the student.

Strong feedback is timely, specific, actionable (pointing students in the direction of more information) and useful. Students are given opportunities to re-learn and practise the skill again right away.

To feedback well is to "feed forward". That is, as teachers we should ask ourselves: how will I use what I learned in the feedback process to inform my teaching?

Feed forward helps us anticipate misconceptions and decide what needs to be re-taught and to whom. Too many teachers fail to (a) track their feedback, and (b) use the data to alter their upcoming lesson plans.

Many schools are looking to update their marking policies in light of the recent emphasis by Ofsted on students' books and files as evidence of "deeper learning" and "rapid and sustained progress ... over time".

I would advocate moving from a marking policy to a feedback or even feed-forward policy. I'm actually not a big fan of educational jargon, so it doesn't really matter what a school calls its policy as long as the ethos of why we mark is fully understood by staff and pupils alike.

I often ask teachers to complete what appears to be a simple ranking exercise in my training courses to justify why they mark. This often causes a polarisation in groups, as some teachers interpret this as why should they mark, rather than why do they mark.

There are numerous external pressures in schools which compel teachers to mark in a certain way for a certain audience: many teachers mark because there is an upcoming learning-walk or book scrutiny, or because it is school policy to do so.

For marking to be truly effective, it must be seen as part of a process whereby we use assessments to inform the next steps in our teaching, so in essence it should involve feeding forward.

Many schools are still stuck in an older model of planning lessons, teaching them and then marking the work, when really it should be the other way round. Marking the work allows the teacher to "plan astutely" (to use more Ofsted speak) and then teach more effectively.

They do not expect every subject or phase to follow exactly the same procedures, but rather set an expectation for an approach in each context. It would be very difficult for a maths teacher to provide feedback in the same way as a teacher marking English written work.

They will also give guidance on the regularity of marking, and they often suggest different levels of detail in marking. It would be impossible and unproductive to mark every piece of work in the same depth; an appropriate balance needs to be struck in each subject and school context. For example, some primary schools have one focused piece of written work each week, and on the following day allocate time for feedback and for pupils to respond to marking. Any policy must have the students at the heart of it.

Encouragingly, when asked why they mark, most teachers will describe a positive impact it has on their students' learning, progress or independence.

I'm heartened that individual teachers have not lost sight of this, as many school policies and book scrutinies have become box-ticking exercises based on what we imagine Ofsted will expect when they visit. In reality, we don't mark for Ofsted or for our leadership teams; we mark because we believe it improves individual students' understanding and progression.

Ofsted focus on the outcomes of our marking, not the format, and do not expect a certain style. They will triangulate their decision based on lesson observations and discussions with pupils in order to assess its impact on learning and progression.

Where teachers set work using clear objectives, learning intentions and success criteria, marking is more focused, more useful to learners and quicker for the teacher. It is often true that those who spend a long time marking were not clear about the purpose and intention of the task in the first place.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Staffroom Marking in Schools: Feedback of Feed-forward?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We teachers spend hours and hours marking pupils' work, only to hand all that rich data back to students. What do we hope students will do with the marking? They are likely to compare their marks with other students, and either feel good about themselves or disheartened.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What feedback techniques could you use that make students act on feedback?

There are a few days left before the end of half-term and feedback and marking will be required before the holidays begin. Why not try some of the following and avoid unnecessary marking in your own time.

Recently, I purchased The Sketchnote Handbook: The Illustrated Guide to Visual Notetaking by Mike Rohde; sourced to help develop my blogs and tweets into content that is more interesting and engaging for everyone. Take a look at some of my other blogs featuring sketchnotes?

Strategies:

What feedback techniques could you use that make students think and take action?

The following are 10 strategies that may help you embrace marking and feedback and most of all, help your students act on feedback provided.

1. Delayed Marking:

Student work is not given a grade, or score on the work (although the teacher records a grade in their teacher's mark-book). Teacher written comments address quality of the work, and give guidance as to how to improve. Students need to be given time to read the comments in class to find out how they have achieved. After some time (e.g. one week) the teacher talks with some students individually to discuss the work, the teacher feedback, and the grade or mark that was given to it.

2. Re-Drafting:

Get students to re-do a piece of work for you after a lesson focused on how to improve. Only accept the work if they have now scored a higher mark on it because they understand the feedback on how to improve. The Yellow Box is a useful methodology.

3. Mastery Marking:

Only accept a piece of work when it is of a specific quality. You might only give one grade, an A. Students are expected to continue to re-draft and re-submit their work as many times as necessary in order to achieve an 'A' grade.

4. Student Marking:

Get students to mark their own work, and their peers' work, using student friendly mark-schemes.

5. Colour Highlighting:

Students are given coloured pens and are expected to highlight on their work where they have shown evidence of different skills according to the requirements of the mark-scheme.

6. Plus, Minus, Equals:

Mark student work in relation to previous work. If the latest work is of the same quality as the last, it receives an '=' if it is better than the last it receives an '+', and if it is not as good as the last it receives a '-'.

7. Focused Marking:

Mark student work against one or two specific criteria, even though there may be many criteria that could be marked. This allows the teacher to provide more focused and detailed feedback on things. The teacher's markbook contains the skill marked rather than the title of the work set.

8. Find and Fix:

Instead of marking answers as correct or incorrect, tell the students the number of answers that were wrong. Give them time in class to find and correct their mistakes either individually or in groups.

9. Margin Marking:

Instead of marking each spelling or grammar mistake, put a mark in the margin for some of them for the students to find their own mistakes, and correct them.

10. Traffic Lights:

Students are given a Red, Amber, or Green mark for a piece of work. All red or amber work can be re-drafted in an attempt to achieve a green mark. The final grade is calculated from the number of Green and Amber marks.

When using any marking strategy, don't leave students with further queries. Why not try Praise, Suggestion, Question as an alternative strategy?

Image: Shutterstock

Staff Training:

What not try some of the above material in your classroom? Are there any other ideas you could use? What examples / photographs of students' work could you provide to match each example above? Why not use this in your next CPD session with colleagues ...

This post is adapted from 12 Ways to Embrace Marking and Feedback and features another sketchnote in my aim to make content more engaging, practical and accessible for teachers.

TT.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What feedback techniques could you use that make students act on feedback? There are a few days left before the end of half-term and feedback and marking will be required before the holidays begin. Why not try some of the following and avoid unnecessary marking in your own time.

# data[].attributes.body
Some tips and ideas shared.

# data[].attributes.body
Structure for assessment criteria required so student can focus on particular areas needed for development

# data[].attributes.body
peer assessment, pupil reflection, progression work to develop further - all built into lesson.

# data[].attributes.body
Guardian article on Ofsteds clarification on what is NOT needed at inspection.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ofsted tells teachers what not to do in effort to dispel inspection myths

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lesson planning and excessive marking not required, Ofsted tells schools, as education secretary Nicky Morgan says the clarifications are aimed at reducing workload

# data[].attributes.body
Survey compares workload for England teacher to counterparts in Europe heavy with marking and admin.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teachers spend less than half their working week in the classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Survey shows time secondary teachers in England - who are younger than peers abroad - spend on admin and preparation

# data[].attributes.body
including myths about what is expected for marking

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tell us whether you accept cookies

We use cookies to collect information about how you use GOV.UK. We use this information to make the website work as well as possible and improve government services.

Guidance for inspecting schools under the common inspection framework, with a mythbuster document on common misconceptions.

This publication was withdrawn on

Documents

Details

Anything relating to the old framework will remain online until October 2019 for reference purposes only.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We use cookies to collect information about how you use GOV.UK. We use this information to make the website work as well as possible and improve government services. Guidance for inspecting schools under the common inspection framework, with a mythbuster document on common misconceptions.

# data[].attributes.body
Inspection handbook lays out expectations for marking in schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Guidance for inspecting schools under the common inspection framework, with a mythbuster document on common misconceptions.

Documents

Details

The handbook sets out what inspectors must do and what schools can expect, and provides guidance for inspectors on making their judgements. It describes the main activities undertaken by inspectors conducting inspections of schools in England under section 5 of the Education Act 2005. It also sets out the judgements that inspectors will make and on which they will report.

It is to be used in inspections under the 'Common inspection framework: education, skills and early years'.

The mythbuster document sets out facts about Ofsted's requirements and dispels myths that can result in unnecessary workloads in schools.

Read the handbook for short, monitoring and unannounced behaviour school inspections.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guidance for inspecting schools under the common inspection framework, with a mythbuster document on common misconceptions. The handbook sets out what inspectors must do and what schools can expect, and provides guidance for inspectors on making their judgements. It describes the main activities undertaken by inspectors conducting inspections of schools in England under section 5 of the Education Act 2005.

# data[].attributes.body
using marking to close the gap between feedback and progression to a higher level of work

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recently I have been looking again at the issue of marking. It is a hugely important source of feedback provided that we keep the volume of marking in proportion to the level of impact it can have in improving learning outcomes. I've discussed this in a much-read earlier post: Marking in Perspective: Selective, Formative, Effective, Reflective. At a whole school level at KEGS and in my own department, a key objective for the year is to devise approaches to marking that deliver maximum impact for all to see - that 'progress over time' issue. What does marking look like when it is clearly securing improvement and progress in learning?

To help with our search I was fortunate to be able to arrange a visit to the wonderful a thriving, dynamic school in NW Essex that recently received an astonishing OfSTED report: Outstanding in every detail. It is a school where teaching and learning and professional dialogue take centre stage and there is a palpable spirit of collaborative working. I'd heard they had an excellent 'whole school approach' to assessment and marking so I was delighted to be invited by the Headteacher, John Hartley, to attend a twilight CPD session preceded by an hour spent dropping in on a few lessons. He described the whole school approach to marking and feedback very simply: It is called Saffron Walden County High School, 'closing the gap'. All that is common is the concept; the theme; the mantra - that students need to close the gap between the work they have done originally and a higher level of work suggested by the feedback they receive. In other words, 'closing the gap' means 'acting on feedback'. The mechanism for doing this is open to interpretation. Sounds simple enough but it was hugely impressive to see in action.

On our walkabout I dropped in on a Y9 Art lesson where the GCSE course was starting; a couple of Y8 English lessons, a Y7 German lesson and a Y9 History lesson among others. The phrase 'close the gap' was being used liberally. In Art, students were closing the gap acting on the feedback written on post-its, both peer-marked and teacher marked; in English, students were re-drafting sections of their work, closing the gap by trying to build in the grammatical and stylistic content from their feedback. As a short-hand for the whole process of acting on feedback, closing the gap seemed well understood by the students.

The twilight CPD session revealed that this initiative was still being developed. The structure of the session was itself a model of exemplary staff CPD: one of several sessions running across the year that staff opt into from a menu of choices; food and drink provided beforehand, staff-led, small groups, interactive, mixing quality input with sharing and discussion - brilliant really. The core of the session was that five tables showcased the marking approaches used in a particular department; we then rotated around to talk to each subject specialist. Here the 'whole school approach' came clear. Far from being some kind of straight-jacket diktat, there was complete freedom to develop the 'closing the gap' concept and the methods were all very different. What they had in common was they focused on recording student responses to feedback; the gap-closing was as important as the marking.

In English, the teacher showed us an old exercise book - from a couple of years ago. Her marking was thorough - page after page of comment, later developing a www/ebi approach; comprehensive teacher feedback. But.... no student response. None - except the ephemeral hit and hope kind. In her current students' books the teacher comments were shorter and the students were obliged to respond straight away. This had crystallized mini dialogues in the books and there were re-drafted paragraphs emerging where the students had attempted to address the issues raised in their feedback straight away. Gaps were being closed. Comparing the two approaches, without any doubt, this new strong emphasis and insistence that comments must be acted upon was powerful.

Around the room, further examples followed. A grid system for Art recording teacher feedback and student action, A4 feedback sheets stuck in books in Science with a large box where students had to record their gap-closing work, Maths books where students were making attempts to identify and correct errors in response to teacher feedback, Humanities books where 6/8 mark answers had to be re-drafted taking account of teacher feedback on previous attempts; DT projects where feedback and self assessment were recorded and dated logging progress as the project proceeded through stages. In every case closing the gap appeared to be making an impact and the teachers all seemed to feel that it had helped them re-focus their marking so that comments were actionable and the overall volume realistic.

For sure, this approach makes the learning more visible to an external observer and we will be trying to emulate this approach in my own department at KEGS. Our book reviews have shown us that, without doubt, the most impressive marking is marking that has been acted upon. John and I agree that we'd rather see a few small steps of clear progress built on simple marking rather than screes of comments that students don't appear to have read!

Thanks to Polly Lankester, AHT at SWCHS, for organising the CPD and to John, Headteacher , for your hospitality. It was a wonderful afternoon.

UPDATE: Here is another great resource via SWCHS giving ideas for transferring responsibility to students as part of the closing the gap process. This comes via Nathan Cole - Deputy Head at the fabulous Wilson's School - and the Teaching and Learning team at Wilson's. Nathan was formerly a History teacher at Saffron Walden. I think this is genius.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recently I have been looking again at the issue of marking. It is a hugely important source of feedback provided that we keep the volume of marking in proportion to the level of impact it can have in improving learning outcomes. I've discussed this in a much-read earlier post: Marking in Perspective: Selective, Formative, Effective,...

# data[].attributes.body
March 2016 - "Eliminating unnecessary workload around marking"