Feedback

Ideas for feedback from recent research literature

• Feedback ideally promotes a high degree of metacognitive awareness in the student
  
  
• Academics and students need to monitor and review their assessment and feedback regimes and share good practice, both internally and externally; action taken by departments as a result of listening to the student voice results in increased satisfaction, reflected in NSS scores, but this can take several years (Williams and Kane, 2009)
  
  
• The power of feedback is influenced by the direction of the feedback relative to performance on a task. Specifically, feedback is more effective when it provides information on correct rather than incorrect responses, and when it builds on changes from previous trials… It appears to have most impact when goals are specific and challenging but task complexity is low (Hattie and Timperley, 2007)
  
  
• Feedback on process and self-regulation is more powerful than feedback about the task; these three forms of feedback are more powerful than grades (Hattie and Timperley, 2007)
  
  
• Detailed, specific, descriptive feedback which focuses students’ attention on their work rather than the self is the most advantageous kind of information for students (Lipnevich and Smith, 2009)
  
  
• Peer corrections and giving suggestions allow students to see similar problems and weaknesses in their own writing (Falchikov, 2005)
  
  
• Feedback is generally delivered in academic discourse which students may not have full access to… the language in which the tutor comments are encoded… discourses may vary across disciplines, across subjects and across tutors (Carless, 2006)
  
  
• Tutors perceive their feedback more positively than students do… feedback is rarely followed by actions to improve student learning; feedback on drafts is much more helpful than comments on the final version (Carless, 2006)
  
  
• Nature, time and quality of feedback are important (Rice, 2005)
  
  
• Feedback is more effective when information is gathered from oneself as well as from others; feedback is more effective when the information is perceived to be as credible, knowledgeable and well-intentioned; feedback is more effective when it is focussed and when it focuses on the behaviour rather than the person; feedback is more effective when it is descriptive rather than evaluative; moreover: feedback needs to be considered a process and not a one-time quick fix; recipients should be involved in the feedback process as part of routine professional expectations; feedback is more effective when it is derived from self-discovery; it should contain a moderate amount of positive feedback and a selected and limited amount of negative feedback; feedback is more positive when negative information is ‘sandwiched’ between positive information; feedback should reduce uncertainty and allows for response and interaction; the feedback cycle should be bi-directional; feedback is more positive when it relates to goals that are defined by the recipient; feedback is more effective when given frequently, but not excessively; feedback is more effective when positive information is given in the grammatical second person and when negative feedback is given in the grammatical first or third person, or in a question (Brinko, 1993)
  
  
• Students go from one module to another without a sense of cumulative development… The solution lies in providing more personal contact and interaction, so that the ideal of an academic relationship becomes more a reality (Furedi, 2009)
  
  
• Feedback is still seen as mainly the responsibility of the teachers and conceptualised as a transmission process; feedback both regulates and is regulated by motivational beliefs; internal feedback refers to increased understanding and changes of perception in self-ability; externally observable outcomes refer to tangible products (essays) or behaviours (student presentation); internal feedback is derived from a comparison of current progress against desired goals; the development of self-regulation in students can be facilitated by structuring learning environments in ways that make learning processes explicit, through meta-cognitive training; it is important to discuss criteria and standards in class; self and peer assessment are particularly effective; students must be helped to construct meaning out of feedback messages in order to regulate performance; students pay less attention to feedback, when given a mark; it is useful to include a two-stage submission process for coursework (Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick, 2005)
  
  
• Tutors and students often have quite different beliefs about the assessment goals and criteria (Hounsell, 2003)
  
  
• It is important to change the marking schemes so that feedback can concentrate on supporting learning rather than on justifying grades; changing assignments so that feedback from one assignment is useful for students in the next assignment; institutional context contributes more to variance in students’ perceptions than does the context provided by individual courses (Brown, Gibbs & Glover, 2003)
  
  
• One needs to distinguish between synchronous feedback (adjustments in behaviour during one-to-one or class discussion) and asynchronous; asynchronous feedback includes teachers’ feedback through grading practices; self-regulation is very important for feedback to be effective; unclear negative feedback where there is uncertain self-image can lead to poor performance (Black & William, 2009)
  
  
• Feed-forward is important as it is formative; the less people believe in themselves, the more they need feedback; general feedback, based on learning outcomes, is more important than feedback on specifics; providing model answers is important; students should be informed about the variety of assessment and feedback; it is important that learners create a short action plan based on previous comments; learners should react to your feedback and incorporate their responses in the next piece of work; academics should help students understand the purposes of formative feedback; it is useful to provide more feedback at the beginning of a course; get learners to give feedback not just receive it (Rice, 2005).

Bibliography

Articles

Black, P. and William, D. (2009) ‘Developing the theory of formative assessment’. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability21:5-31

Brinko, K. T. (1993) ‘The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching: what is effective?’. The Journal of Higher Education. 64:5, pp. 574-593.

Brown, E., Gibbs, G. and Glover, C.  (2003). ‘Evaluation tools for investigating the impact of assessment regimes on student learning’. Open University Press

Carless, D. (2006). ‘Differing perceptions in the feedback process’. Studies in Higher Education. 31:2, pp. 219-233.

Furedi, F. (2009) ‘Conversational Gambit’. Times Higher Education.

Higgins, R., Hartley, P. and Skelton, A. (2002) ‘The conscientious consumer: the role of assessment feedback in student learning’. Studies in Higher Education. 27:1, pp. 53-64.

Hounsell, D. (2003) ‘Student feedback, learning and development’. Slowley, M. and Watson, D. (eds). Higher Education and the Lifecourse. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Lipnevich, A.A. & Smith, J.K. (2009) 'I really need feedback to learn:" students' perspectives on the effectiveness of the differential feedback messages.' Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. 21:4, pp.347-367.

Mutch, A. (2003) ‘ Exploring the practice of feedback to students’. Active Learning in Higher Education. 4, pp. 24-38

Nicol, D. J. and 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, pp. 199-218.

Pitts, S. E. (2005) ‘Testing, testing… How do students use written feedback’. Active Learning in Higher Education. 6:3, pp.218-229.

Rae, A. and Cochrane, D. K. (2008) ‘ Listening to students: how to make written assessment feedback useful’. Active Learning in Higher Education 9, pp. 217-230.

Shute, V. J. (2008) ‘Focus on formative feedback’. Review of Educational Research. 78; 153

van de Berg, I., Admiraal, W. and Pilot, A. (2006) ‘Design principles and outcomes of peer assessment in higher education’. Studies in Higher Education. 31: 3, pp. 341-356.

Williams, J. and Kane, D. (2008) 'Exploring the National Student Survey: Assessment and Feedback Issues'. Centre for Research Quality. HEA.

Yorke, M. (2003) ‘Formative assessment in higher education: movers towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice’. Higher Education Research and Development, 20:2, pp. 115-126.

Books

Boud, D. and Flachikov, N. (2007).  Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education: Learning for the Longer Term. London: Routledge

Falchikov, N. (2005). Improving Assessment through Student Involvement: Practical Solutions for aiding learning in higher and further education. London: Routledge

Race, P. (2003). Making Learning Happen: A Guide to Post-Compulsory Education. London: Sage