Even though I recommend Mark Barnes’ SE2R feedback model, and have written about that, here, there’s a bit more to his “Assessment 3.0” book than just the model. It warrants further reading…

The “Why?” + Problems
The first two chapters cover why you’d want to abandon old practices, and get into problems with traditional grading, like 100-point scale and zeros. This is good, because grades often get misinterpreted as “feedback” despite no theory explaining how a letter/score/rating should be used to improve learning. These chapters set the stage for actual feedback that follows. Here’s the basic model of the S, the E, and the two Rs:

Summarize (e.g., “You wrote a one-page summary of the topic.”)
Explain (e.g., “You defined the similarities between X and Y. I didn’t see any statements to support your claim, though. Do you see them?”)
Redirect (e.g., “Add supporting statements and resubmit.”)
Resubmit (e.g., “When you finish, send me an email.”)

If the book stopped here, it’d still be recommended reading. What follows is a chapter outlining a school districts adoption of SE2R. Read that if you have a feeling your school is looking for widespread change that goes beyond your classroom.

Too Much Writing & Involving Students
One reason teachers have trouble moving away from traditional systems is either the perceived, or very real fear of having to write lengthy feedback. And for everyone coming from an 8/10 kind of scoring system, literally anything will be 100% more writing, let alone what it actually can become sentences to paragraphs. Mark Barnes has a good warning: DON’T DO THAT! Check out p. 65 for an example of how fast SE2R can be, also reminding us that not all feedback need be written/recorded! Even just going around the room giving this kind of feedback can save time and increase learning.

In short, he neglected to involve students when first developing the SE2R model a try. The solution was to “write less and help [his] students more by creating an ongoing dialogue about learning” (p. 62). This certainly aligns with the literature on classroom assessment, specifically characteristics of formative assessment (e.g., Butler, 1987; Falchikov & Goldfinch, 2000; Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006; Sadler, 1989).

Shorthand ≠ Student Codes
To make things even more streamlined, Barnes kept notes that pertained to common feedback. One thing to keep in mind is that these shorthand notes were not on some kind of code sheet that students had to consult to get their feedback. Instead, Barnes would write down the shorthand notes on a roster to organize what would eventually get to the student. He would copy the actual feedback on the “SE2R Conversion” column (Figure 5.1, p. 63), and paste into each student’s comment section.

Portfolios
Emerging as the hero in classroom assessment, Barnes has good ideas on how to use a portfolio with SE2R. I particularly like how students record what they actually do (pp. 68-69). A graduate student asked me about evidence that students a) understood feedback, and b) recognized the gaps (Sadler, 1989) that wasn’t a back-and-forth dialogue. While one source could definitely be the revised product, fulfilling c) doing something to improve learning (Sadler, 1989), another could be to have students document what they did next. Barnes calls this “feedback resolution” (p. 68).

Reflection Questions
The list of questions used for conversations about learning, such as “what will you do next?” and “do you agree with my explanation of what you did?” bring SE2R to the next level, whether that’s off the page/out of the gradebook, or moving verbal feedback towards genuine learning, not points and grades.

References

Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 474–482

Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287–322.

Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.