Effectively feeding forward from one written assessment task to the next

Most studies into lecturers’ written feedback focus on the types of feedback found to be effective when students have the opportunity to act on that feedback, revise their written assignment and improve the mark they receive. But often students do not have this opportunity. Typically, they receive a mark and feedback on an assignment that they will never be able to rework and resubmit. This can leave students unsure about what to do with the feedback they receive. This paper reports on the use of high impact written feedback from lecturers that significantly improved student outcomes and grades from one assessment task to the next. It examines a range of factors which together make feedback in this context effective including: assessment design, use of grading standards and tutor training. These findings from a very large unit have significant implications for teaching staff who want to use feedback to feed forward and make a real difference to their students’ learning.     

Providing Students with Written Feedback on Their Assessment: A Collaborative Self-Study Exploring the Nexus of Research and Practice

This article is an account of a collaborative self-study of the process of providing written feedback on assessment to our teacher education students. Our five-year study grew out of concerns that written feedback might not always meet the learning needs of our students. The study was informed by on-going analysis of our reading of the relevant literature, our experience conducting a qualitative research study of students' perceptions of written feedback on assessment, and our professional conversations along the way. We became increasingly aware that our personal beliefs about learning and teaching underpin our respective approaches to providing written feedback on assessment. The process of critical reflection enabled us to achieve a congruence of professional practice that resolved our concerns about the nature of written feedback and enhanced our respective pedagogical practices.     

Using summative and formative assessments to evaluate EFL teachers’ teaching performance

Using classroom observations (formative) and student course experience survey results (summative) to evaluate English lecturers’ teaching performances is not new in practice, but surprisingly only a few studies have investigated this issue in a higher education context. This study was conducted in an English department of a large university in Vietnam. The data include: (1) semi-structured interviews with all the full-time lecturers, (2) two department heads and (3) course experience surveys from English as a foreign language (EFL) students (N?=?2886). Three lessons can be learned: (1) formative assessments do not seem to have an effect on promoting better teaching practices when their feedback is not helpful in improving high-stakes summative assessment results, (2) without sharing a common definition of good teaching practices among assessors, summative assessments appear to make the feedback from formative assessments less meaningful and applicable, and (3) as a result, the combination of formative and summative assessments tends to make EFL lecturers’ self-assessment practices less effective.     

Student perceptions of quality feedback in teacher education

Many reports have identified a perceived lack of quality in regard to assessment feedback in higher education contexts. One research study in 2007 on undergraduate university students found that less than half of the students (46%) collected their formative feedback, suggesting that from their perspective feedback clearly was not fulfilling the role it should. This is a study of 465 graduate students and 101 undergraduate students studying teacher education at a major Australian university. The study investigated what students perceived to be effective, quality feedback based upon their extensive higher education experiences. Students identified preferences in regard to form, detail and timing of assessment feedback. The data were collected by means of pen and paper survey and identified which strategies the students perceived to be the most effective, particularly within the context of large cohort teaching and written assessment formats. Findings agreed with research elsewhere regarding problems with assessment feedback quality and quantity, but students also provided clear indications of how realistic improvements could be made in terms of assessment feedback processes and strategies.     

Student explanations of their science teachers’ assessments,grading practices and how they learn science

The current paper draws on data generated through group interviews with students who were involved in a larger ethnographic research project performed in three science classrooms. The purpose of the study from which this data was generated, was to understand science teachers’ assessment practices in an upper-secondary school in Sweden. During group interviews students were asked about their conceptions of what were the assessment priority of teachers, why the students were silent during lecturing and their experiences regarding peer- and self-assessments. The research design and analysis of the findings derives from what students told us about their assessments and learning sciences experiences. Students related that besides the results of the written test, they do not know what else teachers assessed and used to determine their grades. It was also found that students did not participate in the discussion on science because of peer-pressure and a fear of disappointing their peers. Student silence is also linked with student conceptions of science learning and student experiences with methodologies of teaching and learning sciences.     

Equitable Classroom Assessment: Promoting Self-Development and Self-Determination

Assessment of students’ learning in school is deeply implicated in teaching for social justice. Yet classroom assessment is neglected relative to other aspects of curriculum and pedagogy in the literature on teaching for social justice. Some books have a relatively clear theory of anti-oppression education at their core but do not provide details about the links between assessment and their anti-oppression theory, while others provide a more detailed view of assessment practices but do not specify precisely how particular assessment strategies either promote or hinder anti-oppression education. This article provides a theoretical framework that spotlights key links between teaching for social justice and classroom assessment. To illustrate these connections, we draw on guided group discussions with ten high school social studies and English teachers, interested in pursuing professional development in this area. We conceptualize assessment as a set of institutional processes with the potential either to inhibit or nurture the development of young people as well as their capacity for self-determination. We analyze: (a) how teachers, through various assessment practices, can attempt to enable equitable relations within and beyond the classroom; and (b) performance standards aimed at helping teachers assess their students’ progress toward becoming more socially responsible and, ultimately, more self-determining. We conclude that even as teachers struggle to enact more socially just assessment practices, they need to communicate clearly with students and parents about what constitutes equitable assessment and what institutional practices, by contrast, sow seeds of self-doubt and lead to destructive labeling, ranking, and gate keeping.     

The introduction and refinement of the assessment of digitally recorded audio presentations

Abstract

This case study critically evaluates benefits and challenges of a form of assessment included in a final year undergraduate Religious Studies Open University module, which combines a written essay task with a digital audio recording of a short oral presentation. Based on the analysis of student and tutor feedback and sample assignments, this study critically examines how teaching and learning practices linked to this novel form of assessment have been iteratively developed in light of the project findings over a period of two years. It concludes that while this form of assessment poses a number of challenges, it can create valuable opportunities for the development of transferable twenty-first-century graduate employability skills as well as deep, effective learning experiences, particularly – though not exclusively – in distance learning settings.     

Leaving certificate accounting: Measuring students’ perceptions with the course experience questionnaire

Abstract

This study uses the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) to explore tertiary students’ perceptions of their recently completed Leaving Certificate higher‐level Accounting course. Overall it finds that students hold positive views of the course, consider the workload and assessment were appropriate, and perceive the goals and standards of the course to be clear. Generally, they were happy with the teaching of the course but a significant minority felt their teachers did not provide enough feedback or make the course interesting. While the students believe the course developed some generic skills, disappointingly, they do not feel confident in tackling unfamiliar problems. They also think that the course did not improve their written communication skills or ability to work as a team member. Recommendations about the volume of course material and assessment practices are made to help address these issues.     

To do or not to do with feedback. A study of undergraduate students’ engagement and use of feedback within a portfolio assessment design

Feedback is important for student learning; however, research shows that students can have a number of difficulties when attempting to learn from feedback. Based on an in-depth analysis of undergraduate students’ self-reported reflection logs, we present findings about students’ experiences with oral and written feedback and how they act upon this feedback when a portfolio is the main assessment and learning tool. Our findings indicate that, within our context, students’ overall experiences with receiving feedback are positive. Oral feedback was perceived as particularly valuable to the students while written feedback challenged their understanding. We identified four specific actions the students engaged in to create meaning from the feedback: internal feedback, using oral feedback, initiating dialogue and interacting with peers. The findings indicate that the students take responsibility in the feedback process. The findings are discussed in relation to current perspectives on feedback in higher education.     

What makes for effective feedback: staff and student perspectives

Since the early 2010s the literature has shifted to view feedback as a process that students do where they make sense of information about work they have done, and use it to improve the quality of their subsequent work. In this view, effective feedback needs to demonstrate effects. However, it is unclear if educators and students share this understanding of feedback. This paper reports a qualitative investigation of what educators and students think the purpose of feedback is, and what they think makes feedback effective. We administered a survey on feedback that was completed by 406 staff and 4514 students from two Australian universities. Inductive thematic analysis was conducted on data from a sample of 323 staff with assessment responsibilities and 400 students. Staff and students largely thought the purpose of feedback was improvement. With respect to what makes feedback effective, staff mostly discussed feedback design matters like timing, modalities and connected tasks. In contrast, students mostly wrote that high-quality feedback comments make feedback effective – especially comments that are usable, detailed, considerate of affect and personalised to the student’s own work. This study may assist researchers, educators and academic developers in refocusing their efforts in improving feedback.     

Conceptualizing and Exemplifying Science Teachers' Assessment Expertise

Although research in science education has led to new assessment forms and functions, the reality is that little work has been done to unpack and capture what it means for a teacher to develop expertise at assessing science. The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, I suggest a conceptualization of assessment expertise that is organized around three dimensions: (a) designing aligned and theoretically cohesive assessment (Design), (b) using assessment to support students' science learning (Use), and (c) equitably assessing language minorities (Equity). The second purpose is to suggest and exemplify various levels of teaching expertise across the three conceptual dimensions using written assessment plans gathered from a study on secondary science pre-service teachers' assessment growth. The contribution of this paper lies in its further conceptual development of assessment expertise, instantiated in a rubric, which can spark discussion about how to capture the range of assessment practices that might be found in science classrooms as well as move toward a potential learning progression of assessment expertise.     

Chinese university EFL teachers’ beliefs and practices of classroom writing assessment

This study investigates the extent to which university teachers’ beliefs about classroom writing assessment are congruent with their self-perceived practices in English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) contexts, and what factors contribute to belief-practice inconsistencies. Drawing on data from a survey of 136 Chinese university EFL writing teachers and ten teacher interviews, results showed a degree of belief-practice alignment regarding assessment for learning (AfL) practices that make learning explicit, but belief-practice discrepancies were more salient. AfL practices that empower students to take responsibility in writing assessment were perceived to be more important than assessment of learning practices; however, the reverse was found in teachers’ practice. Impacts of micro-level factors including assessment training, teaching experience, student attributes, meso-level school factors, and macro-level assessment culture are discussed, and implications are drawn.     

The under-attainment of ethnic minority students in UK higher education: what we know and what we don’t know

In UK higher education, ethnic differences in academic attainment are ubiquitous and have persisted for many years. They are only partly explained by ethnic differences in entry qualifications. They vary from one institution to another and from one subject area to another. This suggests that they result in part from teaching and assessment practices in different institutions and subjects. We do not really know whether ethnic differences in attainment are reflected in variations in the student experience. We do not know what factors are responsible for the ethnic differences in attainment that remain when differences in entry qualifications have been taken into account. Finally, we do not know what aspects of teaching and assessment practices are responsible for variations in the attainment gap.     

Mathematics student teachers’ views on tutor feedback during teaching practice

A group of students studying to become mathematics teachers were asked to comment on the tutor feedback they received during teaching practice (TP) and to offer suggestions aimed at improving this feedback. Analysis of the written data – which was collected through emails – suggests the need for: (i) all TP tutors to provide good quality feedback; (ii) action aimed at deepening students’ understanding of feedback; and (iii) feedback improvement strategies that take into consideration the students’ sense of practicality. The ensuing discussion serves to promote the idea that teachers-to-be can learn a lot about the constructive role of feedback when they observe their tutors managing successfully during TP the inherent tensions between the formative and summative dimensions of assessment. This would require however a shift in pre-service teacher education from simply ‘teaching by telling’ to also ‘teaching by example’.     

An analysis of the effectiveness of feedback to students on assessed work

This paper presents the views of students, from a range of schools and disciplines, on the effectiveness of current assessment feedback practices at Flinders University. We also report on a workshop on feedback with teachers. Overall, individual written comments were found to be the most useful form of feedback. However, there was significant variation with the level of satisfaction with feedback and the relative usefulness of different forms of feedback across the different schools and disciplines. This research suggests both the need to improve the effectiveness of such feedback and to tailor the forms of feedback offered to students according to the distinctive teaching and learning environments in different schools and disciplines. To that end, innovation and further research on feedback are justified, and some suggestions are offered.     

Student perspectives on formative feedback as part of writing portfolios

Despite the crucial role that students play in formative assessment practices, student perspectives on such practices are relatively under-researched. Through a qualitative analysis of 128 reflection notes written by student teachers of English, this article investigates the students’ perceptions of formative feedback as part of portfolio assessment at two teacher education institutions in Norway. As such, it contributes to bridging the gap between research and practice. Students received peer and teacher feedback on assignments and wrote reflection notes during the semester. Findings show that students are positive towards teacher feedback and highlight the significance of teacher praise. Main objections raised against peer feedback concern the lack of constructive criticism. However, positive attitudes towards peer discussion groups suggest that they may be a more effective way of implementing peer assessment than formalised written peer commentary. Student reflections suggest that a failure to understand the task and the feedback is a possible hindrance to successfully revising assignments. Overall, students’ positive attitudes towards the portfolio process, which includes multiple drafting, suggest that students in higher education would benefit from more opportunities to revise and resubmit their work, yet they need adequate practice in providing peer feedback, and interpreting and implementing feedback in general.     

Science and Language Teachers’ Assessment of Upper Secondary Students’ Socioscientific Argumentation

Researchers and policy-makers have recognized the importance of including and promoting socioscientific argumentation in science education worldwide. The Swedish curriculum focuses more than ever on socioscientific issues (SSI) as well. However, teaching socioscientific argumentation is not an easy task for science teachers and one of the more distinguished difficulties is the assessment of students’ performance. In this study, we investigate and compare how science and Swedish language teachers, participating in an SSI-driven project, assessed students’ written argumentation about global warming. Swedish language teachers have a long history of teaching and assessing argumentation and therefore it was of interest to identify possible gaps between the two groups of teachers’ assessment practices. The results showed that the science teachers focused on students’ content knowledge within their subjects, whereas the Swedish language teachers included students’ abilities to select and use content knowledge from reliable reference resources, the structure of the argumentation and the form of language used. Since the Swedish language teachers’ assessment correlated more with previous research about quality in socioscientific argumentation, we suggest that a closer co-operation between the two groups could be beneficial in terms of enhancing the quality of assessment. Moreover, SSI teaching and learning as well as assessment of socioscientific argumentation ought to be included in teacher training programs for both pre- and in-service science teachers.     

Editorial

In earlier papers, we considered some of the pedagogy and assessment practices enacted by physical education (PE) teachers, when attempting to translate a centrally prescribed rationale into meaningful performance-led teaching within an integrated curriculum—Higher Still Physical Education (HSPE) in Scotland. One recurring theme from the data collected was anecdotal assertions from teachers that students were disadvantaged from achieving high levels of authentic attainment by written assessment instruments. Accordingly, students completed oral assessments, which were subsequently transcribed and marked to the same criteria as their written examination answers. However, results indicated that students were not disadvantaged as claimed. On the contrary, results highlighted that to various extents weaknesses in content knowledge were partially concealed through holistic written assessment. More optimistically, findings indicated that oral interviews could provide a constructive atmosphere for ongoing assessment, as well as providing informative feedback for teachers to utilize as part of their reflections on practice. Evidence from Senior Level Physical Education (SLPE) in Australia highlights the importance of language in dialogue and discussion within integrated teaching, learning and assessment environments. Consequently, a wider review of the functions such awards might play in students' school experiences prior to higher education appears merited.     

Identifying mentors’ observations for providing feedback

Mentors’ feedback can assist preservice teachers’ development; yet feedback tends to be variable from one mentor to the next. What do mentors observe for providing feedback? In this study, 24 mentors observed a final-year preservice teacher through a professionally video-recorded lesson and provided written notes for feedback. They observed the lesson for a second time and focused their feedback on the preservice teacher’s questioning only. Findings showed that the mentors’ written feedback varied considerably when open observations occurred. However, there were fewer items when they focused on one teaching practice (i.e. questioning), which also provided a deeper analysis of this specific practice. Research is required around the dimensions of observations (i.e. visual, auditory and conceptual), observations of specific practices, and methodological approaches for observing and collecting data about a preservice teacher’s practice.