Separate feedback provision from competency certification, using feedback-approved reviewers or pre-submission review¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · no claims cited

Description¶

The article reports that reviewers' feedback on submissions tends to be more varied in focus and quality than their scores, and variability could be perceived as undermining scoring decisions. It proposes creating a training module with rigorous vetting specifically for feedback-approved reviewers, or offering a pre-submission review with no guarantees of scoring outcome, reasoning that feedback suits formative assessment while certification of competency might be more easily carried out separately from the process of gaining competency.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Additional investment of time to develop feedback benchmarks and adequate training

Constraints¶

• The article states the role of feedback in the review process is an area in need of additional exploration

Target Learners¶

• micro-credential earners seeking growth-oriented feedback

Target Learning Goals¶

• improving resubmissions and professional learning through formative feedback

Related Strategies¶

• Maintain reviewer quality through explicit benchmark checks and implicit analytics on scoring drift

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Michelle Riconscente, Designs for Learning, Inc. (2016). Designing a Process for Micro-credentials at Scale. Digital Promise. https://digitalpromise.dspacedirect.org/items/ddd022c9-a271-4548-9667-38dbfe9bf9c6