↓ Skip to main content

Translating evidence-based guidelines to improve feedback practices: the interACT case study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
214 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Translating evidence-based guidelines to improve feedback practices: the interACT case study
Published in
BMC Medical Education, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0562-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen L. Barton, Susie J. Schofield, Sean McAleer, Rola Ajjawi

Abstract

There has been a substantial body of research examining feedback practices, yet the assessment and feedback landscape in higher education is described as 'stubbornly resistant to change'. The aim of this paper is to present a case study demonstrating how an entire programme's assessment and feedback practices were re-engineered and evaluated in line with evidence from the literature in the interACT (Interaction and Collaboration via Technology) project. Informed by action research the project conducted two cycles of planning, action, evaluation and reflection. Four key pedagogical principles informed the re-design of the assessment and feedback practices. Evaluation activities included document analysis, interviews with staff (n = 10) and students (n = 7), and student questionnaires (n = 54). Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the questionnaire data. Framework thematic analysis was used to develop themes across the interview data. InterACT was reported by students and staff to promote self-evaluation, engagement with feedback and feedback dialogue. Streamlining the process after the first cycle of action research was crucial for improving engagement of students and staff. The interACT process of promoting self-evaluation, reflection on feedback, feedback dialogue and longitudinal perspectives of feedback has clear benefits and should be transferable to other contexts. InterACT has involved comprehensive re-engineering of the assessment and feedback processes using educational principles to guide the design taking into account stakeholder perspectives. These principles and the strategies to enact them should be transferable to other contexts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 214 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 213 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 17%
Student > Postgraduate 20 9%
Researcher 17 8%
Other 15 7%
Lecturer 13 6%
Other 56 26%
Unknown 57 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 82 38%
Social Sciences 19 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 6%
Psychology 7 3%
Engineering 7 3%
Other 23 11%
Unknown 63 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 October 2019.
All research outputs
#3,952,522
of 23,674,309 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#650
of 3,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,457
of 403,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#16
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,674,309 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,536 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 403,729 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.