Learning and Exposure Affect Environmental Perception Less than Evolutionary Navigation Costs

Russell E. Jackson is with University of Idaho, Chéla R. Willey is with University of California Los Angeles, Lawrence K. Cormack is with UT Austin.Most behaviors are conditional upon successful navigation of the environment, which depends upon distance perception learned over repeated trials. Unfortunately, we understand little about how learning affects distance perception–especially in the most common human navigational scenario, that of adult navigation in familiar environments. Further, dominant theories predict mutually exclusive effects of learning on distance perception, especially when the risks or costs of navigation differ. We tested these competing predictions in four experiments in which we also presented evolutionarily relevant navigation costs. Methods included within- and between-subjects comparisons and longitudinal designs in laboratory and real-world settings. Data suggested that adult distance estimation rapidly reflects evolutionarily relevant navigation costs and repeated exposure does little to change this. Human distance perception may have evolved to reflect navigation costs quickly and reliably in order to provide a stable signal to other behaviors and with little regard for objective accuracy.Psycholog

Building a community of practice to improve inter marker standardisation and consistency

Copyright © 2015 SEFI. Over several years the authors have coordinated engineering subjects, with large cohorts of up to 300+ students. In each case, lectures were supported by tutorials. In the larger subjects it was not uncommon to have in excess of 10 tutors, where each tutor is responsible for grading the assessment tasks for students in their tutorial. A common issue faced by lecturers of large multiple tutor subjects is how to achieve a consistent standard of marking between different tutors. To address this issue the authors initially used a number of methods including double-blind marking and remarking. This process was improved by using the benchmarking tool in SPARKPLUS [1] to compare both the grading and feedback provided by different tutors for a number of randomly selected project tasks. In these studies we found that while students' perception of difference in grading was not unfounded, the problem was exacerbated by inconsistencies in the language tutors use when providing feedback. In this paper, we report using new SPARKPLUS features developed as a result of this previous research to quickly establish and build a community of practice amongst subject tutors. We found that in just one session these processes assisted tutors to reach a higher level of shared understanding of the concepts and practices pertinent to the subject assessment activities. In addition, it enabled tutors to gain an appreciation of the grading issues frequently reported by students. This resulted in not only improving both the understanding and skills of tutors but changing the way they both marked and provided feedback

Improving self- and peer assessment processes with technology

Purpose - As a way of focusing curriculum development and learning outcomes universities have introduced graduate attributes, which their students should develop during their degree course. Some of these attributes are discipline-specific, others are generic to all professions. The development of these attributes can be promoted by the careful use of self- and peer assessment. The authors have previously reported using the self- and peer assessment software tool SPARK in various contexts to facilitate opportunities to practise, develop, assess and provide feedback on these attributes. This research and that of the other developers identified the need to extend the features of SPARK, to increase its flexibility and capacity to provide feedback. This paper seeks to report the results of the initial trials to investigate the potential of these new features to improve learning outcomes. Design/methodology/approach - The paper reviews some of the key literature with regard to self- and peer assessment, discusses the main aspects of the original online self- and peer assessment tool SPARK and the new version SPARKPLUS, reports and analyses the results of a series of student surveys to investigate whether the new features and applications of the tool have improved the learning outcomes in a large multi-disciplinary Engineering Design subject. Findings - It was found that using self- and peer assessment in conjunction with collaborative peer learning activities increased the benefits to students and improved engagement. Furthermore it was found that the new features available in SPARKPLUS facilitated efficient implementation of additional self- and peer assessment processes (assessment of individual work and benchmarking exercises) and improved learning outcomes. The trials demonstrated that the tool assisted in improving students' engagement with and learning from peer learning exercises, the collection and distribution of feedback and helping them to identify their individual strengths and weaknesses. Practical implications: SPARKPLUS facilitates the efficient management of self- and peer assessment processes even in large classes, allowing assessments to be run multiple times a semester without an excessive burden for the coordinating academic. While SPARKPLUS has enormous potential to provide significant benefits to both students and academics, it is necessary to caution that, although a powerful tool, its successful use requires thoughtful and reflective application combined with good assessment design. Originality/value - It was found that the new features available in SPARKPLUS efficiently facilitated the development of new self- and peer assessment processes (assessment of individual work and benchmarking exercises) and improved learning outcomes. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Does pre-feedback self reflection improve student engagement, learning outcomes and tutor facilitation of group feedback sessions?

The authors have previously reported the effectiveness of using self and peer assessment to improve learning outcomes by providing opportunities to practise, assess and provide feedback on students' learning and development. Despite this work and the research of others, we observed some students felt they had nothing to learn from feedback sessions. Hence they missed the opportunity for reflection and to receive feedback to complete the learning cycle. This behaviour suggested that students needed more guidance to facilitate deeper engagement. We hypothesised that student engagement would increase if they were provided with guiding 'feedback catalyst questions' to initiate reflection and facilitate effective feedback on learning outcomes. In this paper we report testing whether this approach assisted students to gain more benefit from the self and peer assessment feedback sessions. In our investigation both students and tutors were asked to evaluate the effectiveness of the feedback catalyst questions in improving student engagement and learning. We found that the pre-feedback self reflection exercise improved learning outcomes and student engagement with more than 80% of students reporting multiple benefits. Furthermore tutors reported that the exercise assisted them to facilitate their sessions. However, not surprisingly the degree of success was related in part to the attitude of the tutor to the exercise. This suggests that while the feedback catalyst questions were extremely effective there is no substitute for enthusiastic and engaging tutorial staff. © 2010 Gardner & Willey

Mapping the landscape of engineering education research: An Australian perspective

The landscape model presented in this paper stimulated dialogue around the nature of topics and research in our community and allowed participants to find a place to belong. We argue that such a dialogue will help us identify, develop and grow our research domain and support those seeking to participate in or move within it. We propose a developmental model that combines the landscape with active pursuit of the characteristics exhibited in quality research. We found that one indication of progress of an emerging researcher on their developmental journey is their use of multiple perspectives, interpretations and dimensions in their research. We suggest that such a model would encourage improvements in quality of the studies in all areas of the landscape, rather than the perception that improvement can be achieved by adopting a specific approach or type of research. A practice versus research dichotomy is ultimately divisive and does little to assist researchers develop their expertise. We believe national conferences should provide a forum for all authors in an environment aimed at improving the quality of research, publications and the development of academics wherever they are on the landscape