This group is large and I do not feel I have built as good a rapport with them as I would like and I have not been able to learn their names, due to the size of the group. I feel this group of students are less engaged with the topic than another group with the same seminar, and I find myself having to work quite hard to build the engagement and interaction. It's worth noting not all students completed my feedback request as it was voluntary.

The START feedback offered some useful insight into how I could drive further engagement through the use of polls, quizzes and other interactive elements. Some modules I deliver have more license to do this and the content lends itself more to these kind of methods, whereas it's not so obvious how I would implement this in this session, but it is something I am willing to investigate, especially if students feel it would add value to the session.

The STOP feedback, whilst nice to not have anything, could have been more helpful, but if this is a genuine reflection of how students feel then it's great.

The CONTINUE feedback was great to read and corroborates the things I am doing to build engagement in terms of building rapport, being friendly, being supportive and answering questions, explaining in more detail where required and my knowledge of the subjects I am covering.

I did think this group's feedback would be different from Group 1 given the size of class, lower engagement levels and feeling of less rapport, but it actually mirrors Group 1's feedback well.

I am a big fan of using horseshoes for discussions and need to establish how I can utilise this method into my seminars. I believe this use of physical space is great a creating equality and rapport, as everyone can see everyone else. This is obviously not always logistically possible, but certainly something I can use more when the group size and room layout allow.

Much of this week's content, particularly about designing learning to have a narrative, social learning and activities, it very corroborating of my existing approach to learning design. I used golden threads to weave everything together, and I like to present a 'roadmap' for my learners, so that they know at all points in the learning journey, where they are, how they have got here and where they are going.

The biggest challenge for me as I head further into my career, is how I bring my previous experience, knowledge and skills to content that I have not created myself, or how I can influence changes in the design.

Your abstract introduces the subject well and places it in the literature. You have given a good account of your method, sample, key results and tied it together with a brief conclusion.

Your introduction presents the subject of study well and gives definitions and uses of processing fluency. You have mentioned the key theory for this area and you have also given your research aims and hypothesis/predictions towards the end.

Your methods section gives a very good account of your sample, design, variables, materials, procedure and you have given some consideration to your ethics.

You have provided an excellent results section which provides a comprehensive account of your descriptive statistics, assumption checking and inferential statistics, well done.

Your discussion provides a recap of key results, links back to the theory of this study, a limitation of the study and a short conclusion or take home message.

Your structured abstract provides concise and clear detail on aims and background, method, key results and conclusion.

Actions for the future

Your abstract could be enhanced with a sentence at the end that talks about the significance of your results e.g. why are your results interesting?

Your introduction could be strengthened with more critical evaluation of the theory or previous studies in this area, which in turn will provide your rationale for your study.

Your methods section could be enhanced with a more detailed account of your ethical considerations e.g. use of a Participant Information sheet, debrief and data security, although this is inferred, you could be more explicit here.

As you mentioned histograms in your results section, you could include them to visualise your data, but not essential.

Your discussion is a little brief and could be enhanced with more discussion of the strengths and limitations of your own study and also some ideas for how your findings could be applied in the real world, e.g. what's the significance of your research?

General feedback

You have provided a reference list and have adhered to APA style broadly throughout your report.

Please ensure all statements and claims are supported with an appropriate citation as there are a few examples of missing citations.

Please use more white space between your paragraphs so the reader can digest the information more easily.

Feedforward

This was a missed opportunity to request some specific feedback following your previous assignments.

Overall a very good report, well done.

Marker TW

Moderated: AL

om has been an absolute delight to work with over the 4007PY module, and has provided invaluable support for the smooth operation of the module. He has always provided whatever kind of support that was required of him; standing in to deliver both lectures and workshops when needed and being present to take questions from students and deliver additional context or experiential knowledge. Tom has consistently been a supportive, knowledgeable, positive presence throughout the module, and I dearly look forward to working with him again in future. JB

Throughout the module I supported students where required, and after the mid semester break, I started teaching both workshops and lectures.

This feedback corroborates my noted strength in simplifying complex concepts (statistics) to make it easy to access and understand, and also the rapport I had built with the students in a relatively small space of time.

However, I think group work can be dependent on the personalities present in the group and individual's willingness to engage with their peers. Some individuals, may be reluctant to engage with others in a group due to language barriers, or perhaps they do not have a desire to share their lack of understanding or knowledge. This is an example I am dealing with currently. Other examples of where group work can be difficult to engage with is where there are dominating personalities present that hog the air time. I like to use 'thinking rounds' to overcome this problem, by structuring and facilitating people's input, by giving everyone exactly 1 minute to share their thoughts.

Another challenge that group work can present is when the work is assessed either summatively or formatively. Some people will not wish to rely on other people for their grades, whilst others may over rely on others for the grades.

Whilst group work does present a number of potential challenges to be overcome, I believe through paying close attention, gathering feedback on progress made and being aware of these potential roadbumps, group work and social learning more broadly a fantastic learning tool.

On reflection, I feel the feedback I offer to students based on their assignments is thorough and I give a good balance of positive feedback and developmental feedback and make it specific to key aspects of their assignments. However, what I have come to in my reflections, is, in my desire for thorough feedback (the way I would want it), am I writing it in such a way that it's easy to engage with, or is the sheer volume of feedback actually creating a barrier to engagement, the complete opposite of what I am trying to achieve?

Moving into this semester's marking period, I now have it front of mind to ensure that whatever feedback I provide, I'm meeting the students need e.g. making it engaging, rather than just my own needs e.g. making it thorough. Perhaps, previously I have taken it for granted that these two needs are one of the same, but perhaps they are not. I am also thinking about what mechanism might be in place to evaluate my feedback, other than internal moderation, as this is from another academic's point of view and not the student's.

This module is very stats based and the complexity builds in each session, meaning it can be a little dry. I was keen to gather feedback from this group due to the nature of the module content, and it has taken some time to build a good rapport with them.

The START feedback, was focussed on some great ideas the students had about returning to previous content that the group may have found tricky previously. This is already something I do as each week builds on the previous, but this feedback has prompted me to be more overt about what I'm doing.

The STOP feedback regarded the pace of sessions being a little too fast for some and also not calling on people by name to answer questions. This is an interesting point, as I know how daunted students can be by stats, so I don't wish to put people on the spot to answer questions for the fear of getting it wrong in front of the peers (even though students are rarely wrong). I do however use this technique when I see students on their phones, to bring them back into the room and back to engaging in the content.

The CONTINUE feedback was lovely to read and there were many complimentary comments about my style, my passion for the subject, my ability to break complex subjects into manageable, relatable chunks and also using the students names, which students really appreciate. The two comments that really stick out from this feedback were 1) a student has swapped workshop groups to come to my workshop as she enjoys my workshops more than another lecturer, and 2) one student mentioned how they felt I cared about the students and their progress, whereas they didn't feel this was always the case in their other seminars, lectures and workshops. Whilst I do not wish to compare myself to other members of faculty, I was great to have my style and approach corroborate by students and the fact that I do care comes through.

However, some methods I have used are:

Talking things through with a peer or my line manager. I'm not necessarily looking for any input from the other person, but verbalising my thoughts out loud and having them heard by another person I find very useful. I use a similar approach for my PhD research with my supervisor, and also my private coaching work with my coaching supervisor. With minimal or no input, I am able to come to my own conclusions.

I have also started using Rolfe's reflective cycle recently (since learning about it in September). The method of evaluating experiences through the lens of 'what, so what and what next?' is something I have found very useful to compartmentalise my thoughts regarding positive and negative situations. This allows me to pay attention to what has happened in the past, then analyse the significance of it and determine what the learning is from this experience. I am then able to consider what my next steps are based on this learning and how I will approach similar situations next time.

I regularly tap into feedback from peers, my line manager and other colleagues. This feedback is both formal through our performance systems, but also add hoc, in the moment feedback too. I also have been regularly seeking feedback from my students, again formerly through MEQs, informally through using Start, Stop, Continue feedback gathering, and more ad hoc during informal conversations. What I have noticed however, is that I do not take enough time for self reflection, and most of my reflection involves a third party.

I recognise that because I have a very strong external frame of reference, I do have a preference for understanding my impact and quality of my teaching from others. Even when I do engage in self reflection, it is often in the presence of my supervisor/line manager. Whilst I don't always require their input, the simple act of thinking out loud is very useful for me and I seem to pay more attention to myself when I say things out loud. This is something I have known about myself for a while, and it works for me, but perhaps there are more alternative ways that I can engage in self reflection, particularly when that third party is not available?

This semester, I have sought out feedback from my formal observation, 3 rounds of Start, Stop, Continue feedback, MEQ feedback, I have requested Core Clear Review feedback from module peers and also had ad hoc conversations with peers and students when the opportunity arose.

This plethora of feedback has really helped shape my progress into my 2nd semester of teaching in HE. A number of approaches I have brought from my previous Learning & Development role have served me well in HE and the feedback I have received has corroborated this e.g. learning and using student's names, explaining complex concepts in easy to understand ways and actually showing how much I care about students.

In terms of changes I have made in response to the various sources of feedback, I have increased my skills in hybrid learning using Engageli during an on campus class, and I have taken more risks with the content and delivered it in ways other than originally intended to build and maintain engagement. Subsequent feedback, corroborates some of the risks I have taken and I will continue to adopt an iterative approach to experience, reflection, action.