Multimodal assessment and like for like feedback: What’s the point?


  • Danielle Tran Greenwich University


At the University of Greenwich, the postgraduate researcher teaching and learning and assessment course is strand two of five of their postgraduate researcher development program. Since the course began in 2011, the second summative assessment has always called for the submission of a purely written critical reflection. In an effort to design a more inclusive assessment and allow room for greater levels of creativity among the PGR’s when reflecting upon their micro-teach, it was made clear to all PGR’s that as long as their submission appropriately met the assessment criteria they had the choice to submit their critical reflection in whatever mode they thought most suitable. Going even further in an effort to develop a more inclusive assessment, students were informed that the tutor feedback given would be ‘like for like’. Out of 34 submissions, 5 went against the traditional structure of a written assessment. This article reviews the benefits and limitations of multimodal assessment and like for like feedback. Drawing on student responses from the end of course survey, the case study reviews the reasons behind the limited multimodal submissions, and the challenges of forming such an assessment.


Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Danielle Tran, Greenwich University

Senior Lecturer in Learning, Teaching, and Professional Development

Educational Development Unit

Greenwich University


Adobe Connect (2018) [accessed: 19 April 2018].

Blake, Caitrin (2015) Creating Memorable, Productive Assignments With Multimodal Composition, Professional Resources, Concordia University, [accessed: 19 April 2018].

Brookhart, Susan M. (2017) How to Give Effective Feedback to Your Students, Second Edition (Alexandria VA, USA: ASCD).

Crook, Anne, Alice Mauchline, Stephen Maw, Clare Lawson, Robyn Drinkwater, Karsten Lundqvist, Paul Orsmond, Stephen Gomez, Julian Park (2012) ‘The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students?’, Computers & Education, 58: 1, pp. 386-396.

McCormack, Coralie, and Mary-Jane Taylor (2006) ‘Electronic delivery of oral feedback on graphic design projects’,Proceedings of the 23rd annual ascilite conference: Who’s learning? Whose technology? ascilite, The University of Sydney [accessed: 19 April 2018] (Available at:

Oldakowski, Tim (2014) ‘A Multimodal Assignment That Enriches Literacy Learning The Problem’, InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, Vol 9, pp. 70-77. [accessed: 19 April 2018].

Poulos, Ann, and Mary Jane Mahony (2008) ‘Effectiveness of feedback: the students’ perspective’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33:2, pp. 143-154

Powtoon (2018) [accessed: April 19 2018].

Ragupathi, Kiruthika (2012) Using multimodal communications for critical thinking assessments, Technology in Pedagogy, No. 10, August 2012. Available at: [accessed: April 19 2018].

Screencastify (2018) [accessed: 19 April 2018].

Weaver, Melanie R. (2006) Do students value feedback? Student perceptions

of tutors’ written responses, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31:3, 379-394, DOI:





How to Cite

Tran, D. (2018). Multimodal assessment and like for like feedback: What’s the point?. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 2(2), 161–180. Retrieved from



Case studies/Practice Pieces