The Effect of Rubric Delivery Method and Additional Written Comments on Future Lab Report Performance

It is not uncommon to hear instructors lament the number of hours spent providing feedback on student writing, only to find their students making the very same mistake on the following assignment. The goal of this study, broadly, was to investigate how the methodology of the feedback provided to students influenced their future performance. Specifically, we investigated how students performed on their weekly 2‐page human physiology lab reports based on the inclusion or exclusion of 1‐2 sentence written comments as feedback (in addition to the grading rubric), and whether the feedback rubric was provided to the student electrically or in hard‐copy form. The subjects included students registered for a large (300 student) human physiology lecture class with an associated laboratory. Seven laboratory instructors taught the fourteen laboratory sections (2 sections per instructor). All students received feedback on their weekly 2‐page lab report using a detailed grading rubric. Each lab instructor provided one lab section with a hard copy of the rubric, while his or her other lab section viewed the rubric electronically via the online course management system's grade‐book. Half the students in every lab section received only the completed rubric (boxes checked) and half of the students also received 1‐2 sentences of written feedback. During the final week of the term, students consented to have their lab report grades included in this study, and provided a self‐assessment via an on‐line survey regarding the number of times they viewed their rubric, how they used the rubric, and their preference regarding a hard copy vs. electronic rubric. Data collection is underway and newly analyzed results will be shared.