ID260 Feedback First, Grade Second

The Idea

Behavioural science shows that the sequence and presentation of information (its design architecture) strongly influence how people engage with it. In assessment, this helps explain a familiar problem: students often fixate on the numeric grade and overlook the written feedback that explains it and points the way to improvement. 

To address this, I propose introducing a feedback-first sequencing feature in the KLE, with a manual workflow as an interim solution. Under this approach, written feedback is released first, with the numeric grade becoming available after a short delay. Releasing the explanation before the grade shifts students' initial attention towards the feedback, increasing the likelihood that they engage with it before the grade draws their focus. 

Practicalities: cohort-level release 

The proposal uses a simple, cohort-wide schedule rather than individual access controls. All students receive written feedback at the same time (for example, 1pm), and everyone receives their numeric grade after a fixed delay (such as two days). The grade release does not depend on whether an individual student has opened or read their feedback. 

The cohort-level approach is simpler to implement, does not disadvantage students who are unavailable during the delay, and avoids having to define what counts as "reading" feedback. Its limitation is that some students may still wait until the grade is available and view both together. Even so, it removes the option to go straight to the grade, creating a structural nudge towards engaging with feedback first rather than requiring it.

Why This Idea Should Be Considered

Substantial staff time is invested in producing high-quality written feedback, yet much of it goes unread because students focus on the numeric grade and look no further. This is not a motivation problem on either side; it is a design problem in how grades and feedback are sequenced within the KLE. 

A pilot on a second-year Psychology module, in which written feedback was released two days before the grade, produced encouraging results from a small student survey (n = 8). Eighty-six per cent of respondents reported reading most or all of the written feedback before the grade was released, and the same proportion said they spent more time engaging with feedback than they normally would. All respondents (100%) found the feedback more useful for their learning and supported using the approach for future assessments. Students' comments reinforced these findings, describing how reading the feedback first helped them absorb it more fully, focus on areas for improvement, and experience less anxiety. As one student commented, understanding their strengths and areas for improvement before seeing the grade made receiving it "a more positive experience." 

The proposed change is low-cost, low-risk, and requires no additional staff effort. By increasing engagement with feedback that is already being produced, it improves the educational value of existing assessment practice, supports student learning and development, and reduces staff frustration that carefully written feedback is often left unread.

How We Would Implement This Idea

In the short term, share the manual sequencing method (release written feedback first, grade two days later) as an optional, opt-in practice, supported by brief guidance for staff and a student-permission/communication template. In the medium term, work with the KLE/learning-technology team to build a native "staggered release" or "feedback-before-grade" setting that lets staff schedule written feedback and grade visibility independently within a single workflow. Pilot the feature across a few willing modules and disciplines, gather data, and refine before wider rollout, paired with light-touch student messaging so the rationale is understood from the outset.

What Success Would Look Like

Success would be demonstrated by measurable increases in the proportion of students who access and engage with written feedback, evidenced through KLE analytics, student surveys, and in-class discussion, while replicating or exceeding the engagement gains observed in the pilot. Students would report that feedback is more useful and actionable, and staff would report greater confidence that their feedback is being read and applied. Over time, there would be evidence that students are using feedback to improve performance in subsequent assessments. The KLE feature itself would be simple for staff to enable in just a few clicks and would achieve sustained adoption across multiple modules and disciplines, with consistent improvements in student engagement with feedback.