1. “I know you think I understand what you thought you said … but I’m not sure realise that what I heard is not what you meant”
Feedback, the NSS and fixing it
Alison bone and jane woods, university of brighton

2. Context
Feedback is widely seen as a powerful influence on student achievement (Evans, 2013; William, 2011; Hattie, 1987)
However National Student Survey (NSS) published annually indicates assessment and feedback is one of the areas with which students are least satisfied
Research shows that tutors’ and students’ perceptions of the value of feedback given vary widely
Why the mismatch in perceptions? How can we check students’ understanding of the feedback we give?
Pilot student research project at Brighton Business school looked into this mismatch

3. Unpacking the issues The mismatch in perceptions
What is feedback? What is the purpose of feedback? (Are students and tutors always aligned on the purpose?)
Measuring the value of feedback to close the gap between students’ and tutors’ perceptions of the value of feedback

4. Looking at the mismatch between tutor and student perceptions
Research by Mulliner, E and Tucker, M (2015) into perceptions of students and academics indicated that perceptions in relation to quality were similar but very different in relation to students’ engagement and interest
There have been a few studies which compare tutor and student viewpoints (e.g. Carless, 2006; Hounsell, 1987)
Juwah et al (2004) suggests students should have opportunity to give feedback on their feedback
More recently O’Donovan (2015) suggests addressing mismatch through a review of the assessment cycle to one based on social constructivist view of learning
Our focus: the mismatch is there: how to address it?

5. Consider fundamentals: what is feedback?
Traditionally feedback a transmission between tutor and student
Little consensus in research literature about what constitutes good external feedback
Strong evidence that feedback messages are “complex and difficult to decipher” and students need opportunities to actively construct an understanding of them (O’Donovan, 2015)
Could ask attendees to discuss with another how they would define FB here. Focus on the HOW of feedback not the WHY
Point 1 – make the point IN CONTRAST TO SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVIST – THIS IS A PASSIVE EXCHANGE
Clarify meanining External FB – i.e. from staff not from student/peer

6. Consider fundamentals: what is feedback?
Focus in improving feedback has been on how the feedback is delivered (e.g. Freeman & Lewis, 1998) For example: feedback should be timely, relevant, should feed forward to other student work
But is it time for feedback to be redefined more radically with the students taking greater agency within their own feedback/learning? (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006; O’Donovan, 2015)
Time for ‘self-regulation’?
Point 2 – There’s a wide recognition of the value of what’s been described as ‘student-centred learning’ in the context of teaching and learning – core assumptions being active engagement in learning and learner responsibility for the management of learning (Lea et al 2003) [LINK THIS TO ANOTHER TALK AT THE ALT CONFERENCE IF POSSIBLE?]. For example Interactive lectures for example widely seen as preferable to passive learning in the lecture hall and for some time (see for example Bonwell & Eison, 1991; Law studies and active learning: friends not foes? The Law Teacher Volume 47, 2013 – Issue 3)
However ‘a parallel shift in relation to formative assessment and feedback has been slower to emerge’ – i.e. to making the student an active participation in the feedback process (Nicola & Macfarlane-Dick) Is this where the mismatch in perceptions of tutor/student begins? The failure for students to be actively engaged in their own learning process?

7. Feedback and self-regulation
“Good quality feedback is information that helps students troubleshoot their own performance and self-correct; that is, it helps students take action to reduce the discrepancy between their intentions and the resulting efforts”
(Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006)
We need to ensure students and tutors both share perceptions of purpose of the FB in order to align student/tutor perceptions of the value of FB (Price et al)

8. How to align tutor and student expectations (O’Donovan, 2015)
Clarify purpose of feedback with students: to correct errors? Give advice for future? Diagnose general problems? Feed forward? (Price et al, 2010)
Develop the student’s ability to self assess
HOW- comply with good feedback practice..
Identify all feedback available
Model the application of feedback
Encourage the application of feedback to increase students’ self- regulation
Identify what is feasible in an assessment context – and do no more!
…but more than that – WHY?
Berry O’Donovan has lots of relevant info here. Identify all forms – e.g. include conversations in seminar groups, in the corridor. Reduce overemphasis on written feedback – oral can be more effective; consider role of marks which obscure feedback
Doing too much feedback can be counter-productive – students stop reading it; and detracts from a shift to self regulation
Fly-in comment - FB gives info about how the student’s present learning and performance relates to the goals and standards of the module. So it’s critical that the goals and standards are clearly demarcated. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick argue also that students who are more effective at self regulation produce better FB and are more able to use that FB to achieve their desired goals.

9. How to discover whether students understand the feedback given (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006)
Encourage teacher and peer dialogue around learning
Focus on student self-regulation:
Involve students in the feedback process: e.g. confirming grading criteria and the purpose of the feedback. Allow students to play active role in constructing meaning from feedback messages
Confirm students’ understanding through requiring them to use criteria e.g. in marking model assignments or exam questions
Gain evidence by requiring students to show they are engaging with the feedback itself e.g. by requiring students to reflect on feedback and incorporate into other tasks
Collect feedback on the feedback itself, at the end of the relevant module, and incorporate appropriate changes into the feedback approach for that module
In the self reg model, for external fb to effective it must be understood and internalised by the student before it can be used to make productive improvements. making students involved in the process – engaged/active in own assessment – we may increase likelihood of their understanding the FB and therefore minimise the mismatch in perceptions / increase the value of the FB to students

10. Feedback at Brighton
All marking of assignments at Brighton Business School is done through Turnitin online.
All lecturers use the comments box at the end and most write comments on the work itself.
Some use rubrics and fewer use voice comments.
There is little quality control on the feedback provided and many lecturers choose their own sample for the external examiner to view

11. The pilot study Three modules selected:
Year 1 Law in Practice module – all law students testing mainly skills – 118 students with 51% response rate. Three lecturers giving feedback
Year 2 Law for Marketing module – all business students – 137 students with 28% response rate. One lecturer responsible for all feedback (part-time – this was her only module)
Year 3 Employment Law module – elective with equal mix of law and business students – 32 students with 88% response rate. Two lecturers giving feedback
Total responses received = 127 = 44% across all three years

12. Q1 Do you read the feedback provided?

13. Q2 Who would you contact if you did not understand your feedback?

14. Q3 If your tutor offered to meet about your feedback would you go?

15. Q4 The comments on my work which are found useful

16. Examples of comments less helpful
“You can do better” “Change structure” “Poor”
Insufficient detail Ambiguous
“Wrong!” No explanation of comment
Comments too brief Just a tick or a cross
Overly critical Those concerning grammar and spelling
“?” Just correcting without explaining “Good”
Comments not relating to rubric grade
Highlighted errors but no comment/correction

17. Q6 On the whole what was the quality/detail of feedback for this module in comparison to others?

18. If you thought the feedback was better or worse for this module please explain why
“Not as clear as other modules”
“I don’t think I received much feedback”
“Barely had any at all and they often don’t seem personal”
“Face to face feedback more openly offered”
“Other feedback more detailed”
“Not condescending” “Voice comments really helpful for another module”
“Forward looking”

19. Final thoughts
Year 1 students more likely to look at feedback and seek help if they do not understand it
Either students’ perception of or the actual quality of feedback seems to diminish as students reach the final year
One to one feedback even if offered is rarely taken up
Students appreciate the use of rubrics relating to the marking criteria
Students also like the personal touch of voice comments
Tutors need to see feedback on THEIR feedback to understand where THEY have “got it wrong”!

20. Sources
Carless, D., (2006) ‘Differing Perceptions in the Feedback Process’ Studies in Higher Education 31(2) Evans, C. (2013) ‘Making Sense of Assessment in Higher Education.’ Review of Educational Research 83(1) Freeman, R., and Lewis, R. (1998) Planning and Implementing Assessment (RoutledgeFalmer, 2nd Ed.) Hattie, J. A. (1987) ‘Identifying the Salient Facets of a Model of Student Learning: A Synthesis of Meta- analyses’ International Journal of Educational Research 11(2): [Google Scholar] Hounsell, D. (1987) ‘Essay Writing and the Quality of Feedback’ In Student Learning: Research in Education and Cognitive Psychology, edited by J.T.E Richardson, M.W. Eysenck , and D. Warren-Piper, (Milton Keynes: Open University Press) Juwah, C., Macfarlane-Dick, D., Matthew, D., Nicol, D., Ross, D., and Smith, B. (2004) Enhancing Student Learning through Formative Feedback The Higher Education Generic Centre

21. Sources
Mulliner, E and Tucker, M (2015) ‘Feedback on feedback practice: perceptions of students and academics’ Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 42(2) Nicol, D., 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) O’Donovan, B, Rust, C., Price, M (2015) ’A scholarly approach to solving the feedback dilemma in practice’ Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 41(6) Price, M., Handley, J., Millar, J., and O’Donovan (2010) ‘Feedback: All that Effort, but What is the Effect?’ Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 35(3) William, D. (2011) ‘What is Assessment for Learning?’ Studies in Educational Evaluation 37(1)