Master’s thesis projects: student perceptions of supervisor feedback

A growing body of research has investigated student perceptions of written feedback in higher education coursework, but few studies have considered feedback perceptions in one-on-one and face-to-face contexts such as master’s thesis projects. In this article, student perceptions of feedback are explored in the context of the supervision of master’s thesis projects, using review studies with respect to effective feedback in coursework situations. Online questionnaires were administered to collect data from three cohorts of master’s students who were either working on their thesis or had recently finished it (N?=?1016). The results of the study indicate that students perceive the focus of feedback in terms of a focus on task and self-regulation; they perceive the goal-relatedness of feedback in terms of feed up (goal-setting) and feed back-forward (how am I going and where to next?); and elaboration of feedback is perceived in terms of positive and negative feedback. Furthermore, students that perceive the feedback to be positive, and to provide information on how they are going and what next steps to take, are the most satisfied with their supervision and perceive they are learning most from their supervisor. The findings are discussed in relation to findings in coursework settings, and are explained using goal orientation theories.     

Myth and Reality: A review of empirical studies on giftedness

In this review all empirically based articles published in the years 1997 and 1998 in five acclaimed journals in the field of research of high ability and talent will be compared. For this purpose several questions will be taken into consideration, including the problems of the identification procedures used, the predominating research questions and the quality of the methodological standards. The results show that it is difficult to compare the studies due to the various procedures used to identify giftedness. In contrast, regarding the thematic orientation of the research studies themselves, the existence of a virulent problem in gifted research could be confirmed. The methodological standards adhered to in the studies give rise to troubling thoughts, possibly the most worrisome outcome being that the integration of a control group occurred in less than one-quarter of the studies. A definitive result of the study is the confirmation that gifted research is conducted within the framework of a fragmented research community where studies are performed under various methodological viewpoints, which are often unsatisfactory. The appearance of approximately one new publication per day is accompanied by the dangers of a metamorphosis of quality into pure quantity and the loss of any sort of conceptual overview. The aim of this article is, therefore, to determine whether these suspicions can be substantiated specifically regarding theoretical and methodological aspects of empirical studies in giftedness research.     

Taking a Second Look: Expert and Novice Differences when Observing the Same Classroom Teaching Segment a Second Time

Expert and beginning principals viewed a classroom teaching episode of a seventh grade mathematics classroom for teacher supervision purposes. After the first viewing participants were asked questions about classroom management and instruction, about the skills of the teacher, and about recommendations they would make for improvement. After a second viewing, similar questions were asked. Differences between groups were found in their understanding of classroom teaching and their abilities to evaluate and make recommendations for the improvement of teaching. This study indicates that important differences will occur in the supervision experience for teachers depending on whether an expert or novice principal supervises them. Findings from this study have implications for the development of preservice and inservice training programs and induction experiences for new principals.