 I want to talk about our aim to give students more consistent feedback. How do we do this? By using verbal feedback. Verbal FICA is kind of a pun. It means feedback to verbal presentations, but also feedback that not just consists of keywords, but is explained in whole phrases and structured text. The authors of this tool at our University of Applied Sciences analyse that often times students do presentation throughout their studies and curricula. That presentation are graded by different lecturers and each and every lecturer has a different set of her and his criteria. That isn't really good for the student's point of view because it's hard then to track on which point you make progress and on which aspects then you might be stuck. So the aim is to have as much lecturers and as much classes use same feedback criteria for presentations. With this in mind, a criteria scheme was developed and reviewed and the moodle activity was programmed. Here's verbal feedback. With verbal feedback after his or her presentation a student gets rated and commented feedback on the set criteria. She or he can then download his or her report. The feedback can be done by more than one lecturer simultaneously and the result in grade is the average of the grades and the added comments are the combination of all the comments of all grading lecturers. Let us look on how that feels in the user interface. So a lecturer adds a verbal feedback activity. I'm sorry if this is a little bit small. I encourage you to then maybe try it out by installing the plugin at your place or looking at the PowerPoint presentation when it will be online. I'm sorry about that but this is a real user interface. I didn't want to enlarge it on some irrational scale. It really does look like that. So a lecturer as I said adds a verbal feedback activity and selects a template. As of now the templates that are delivered alongside with this plugin come in French, German and English. Alongside the template selection they also choose whether the students see the feedback right away or only after they are released. This is the default grading criteria and criteria are grouped to categories that comes along with the standard verbal feedback plugin. It aims at verbal presentations, presentations that students do give in front of you. And it has categories of content, structure, media, speech and body language. How do students perform in these five categories will at the end then be illustrated to the students not only in a table but also in a spideograph. We'll see that later on. Now if I just want four categories for example if media isn't important because they are not allowed to use any media then I would just turn the percentage to zero and equalize the rest in order to sum it up to 100% again. A 0% category is not displayed neither in the grading form nor in the result sheet. The criteria that make up a category can be weighted between each other. If I want to be more weighted more than the other I would just increase the multiplier. A criterion with the multiplier of zero isn't displayed in the sheet. Once done with my customizations I can preview the evaluation sheet or make it available right away. Then a lecture or multiple lectures as I said can go and grade a student who does a verbal presentation. This is the overview of the students about to do a presentation and with the pen I would go and grade that student. So let's say the student does his or her presentation. During the presentation a lecturer signs the grades by clicking you see that which are on a six level scale. For the first time you do this I recommend that you print that out or you have the teacher first learn all the criteria up to the questionnaire beforehand. But so far that wouldn't be very different from a usual rubric isn't it? Here's where the added value kicks in. This is the detail rating. For each criterion different feedback sentences are prepared. When clicking on the plus sign on the right left hand side of this criterion those sentences are presented upon hovering over the four buttons the minus minus the minus the plus and the plus plus. When clicking on one of these four options that sentence that phrase is added in the student comment field. The comment field obviously can as well be amended then but the phrases added by those button clicks are a great starting point. There is also a private comment field as well which is not visible to students and only visible to lectures so she or he can annotate something which she then will be later taking up when she refines that feedback sentence or the feedback field for this criterion. The combined results of all grading lectures are then presented to the student who is graded. This means that the scores values as I said consist of the mean of all grading lectures and the single comments are merged together to form aggregated feedback. To recap so the downloadable PDF file looks like this and of course you can in your Moodle instance change the logo to have the one of your institution. To recap these are the four steps so you configure the questionnaire, your insert activity, configure the questionnaire and adjust what criteria you do want, what categories you want to exclude, includes way differently. Then during the presentation you do a rough evaluation, look at the students, take some notes, you click maybe some of the values then you can do the fine evaluation of the presentation, insert the phrases, the preformat phrases and maybe also adopt them, refine them a little bit. And at the final phase you present that feedback, you release it to the students so that they can watch and see their results and also download their sheet. Well it's a quite versatile thing although we delivered this with that proved and proof-readen standard feedback that we need for our own uses. But for example the École Hôtelière de Lausanne which is a faculty that teaches hotel manager students adopted it to their own needs so they have different criteria, they have attendance or I mean I can't read it so it's a professional attitude and they have prepared their own feedback sentences to the different scales of how these points are achieved or not. We're not done completely because we could go also further on but could we do what is still lacking? At the moment this activity is just two great single students so it has no group mode, we could build in group mode maybe. Initially the worst idea that we can also allow peers to review other students to all the students that doesn't work very fine. You can't just cope with giving them the teacher role because otherwise they would overwrite or delete things that isn't the way to go. You could add testing more and more on the programming side and import xbox functionality for questioners so that you can create your criteria and export it and share it between institutions or faculties or departments. Another idea is why wouldn't we use that also for written assignments or for video presentation or something like that. These are all open points. To customize user interface pretty simple, I won't go into that very deep but with this I'm just happy to answer maybe some questions or here if you have some remarks. Thanks Luca. Raise your hand if you have a question we'll get a mic to you in the centre there please. Hi. Sorry. When you download the activity does it come with all the example, feedback and criteria that you demoed or do you have to do that from scratch yourself? It's in the download. It's in the download and technically it's a YAML file. They look a little bit like these but it's included but only in German, French, English. The other languages are not included in the AMOS strings because it's a whole bunch and it's in this format. If you go download it today it's in the official Moodle plugin directory. If you go download it today and it's in try it on, yeah, go. Follow up, sorry. Does it have the same sort of grading as in the assessment tool? So you can do the same sort of grading. So it grades back to the grade book, that's your question? It grades back to the grade book, yeah. Anyone else? Thank you for all the work by the way this is cool. Just a question about the learner's view like how would they, what do they see from the grade? Because there was no like screens showing the result. I'm not loud enough, normally I am. The learner's view. Sorry, about the learner's view like how, what does the learner see from this grade? The learner sees the table with their means and all their feedback comments. Here it's here that is the visualization. So they see at the left hand side they see the mean and at the right hand side they see the feedback to that criterion. So they see the grade on how that contributed to the total of that grade and if that is the web version, then in the PDF version they would see the same thing. Hi Lukas, I have a question to this. Can you hear me now? Okay, despite the diagram so this is the visualization for the student and is there a comparison to other students results as well or it's just individual one? No, there's no comparison to the other students as well. But what the thinking was that if a lot of verbal feedbacks or feedbacks for presentation are done with the same tool, the students and overall his or her curricula can see that they hopefully increased in some criterion and see that in the category of body language I've improved that in the category of media I may have stuck or even decreased. So that is this idea. It's more about comparative to my former verbal presentation and not between students itself. So it has no comparison, no overlaying other ones. Despite the diagram that you have compared by yourself. Do you have any thoughts or experience with presentations where the graders are all the peers, all the peer students, so class of 20, one is presenting, all others are commenting and the next one starts to present and so on and so forth. No, we have not because it's not really working in that version. So we're open to issues, pull requests, it's on GitHub and a directory and if you have some developer who likes to contribute so she or he can very well present their pull request and maybe develop one of these features.