Feedback is slippery, its meaning changes according to the space(s) you occupy within the perceptual limits that define it; these can range from feedback perceived as correction, to feedback perceived as longitudinal developmental. This provocation focuses on written summative assessment feedback, a format that remains one of the most common practices within academic programmes, that has the potential to be one of the most powerful influences on student growth, development, and learning, and yet which many students report never reading. I develop the argument that written summative assessment feedback is the subject of collective disillusionment – the result of students misunderstanding assessment feedback discourses, and the mismatch(es) between student interpretations and lecturers’ intentions of feedback. As provocateur, I argue that collective disillusionment not only risks the negation of written feedback, but it also seriously threatens learning. I draw upon empirical data to illuminate how paying attention to the kind(s) of work the representation of feedback does can contribute to feedback being reframed for participation and offer an open invitation for further dialogue via Research in Education.
AhmedS (2014) The Cultural Politics of Emotion, 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
2.
AshwinP (2015) Reflective Teaching in Higher Education, London: Bloomsbury Academic.
3.
BarnettR (1997) Higher Education: A Critical Business, Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
4.
Bassey M (1990) On the nature of research in education (part I). Research Intelligence 36(Summer): 35–38.
5.
BeardCHumberstoneBClaytonB (2014) Positive emotions: passionate scholarship and student transformation. Teaching in Higher Education19(6): 630–643.
6.
BerlantL (2011) Cruel Optimism, Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.
7.
Boud D and Molloy E (eds) (2013a) Feedback in Higher and Professional Education. Understanding It and Doing It Well. Abingdon: Routledge.
8.
BoudDMolloyE (2013b) Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education38(6): 698–712.
9.
Bourdieu P (1984, 2010) A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Translated by Richard Nice. Translation published in 1984 by Routledge + Kegan Paul, PLC. First published by Routledge Classics 2010. Oxon: Routledge.
10.
CarlessD (2006) Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education31(2): 219–233.
11.
CarlessD (2007) Learning-oriented assessment: Conceptual bases and practical implications. Innovations in Education and Teaching International44(1): 57–66.
12.
CarlessD (2015) Excellence in University Assessment. Learning from Award-Winning Practice, Abingdon: Routledge.
13.
Glover C and Brown E (2006) Written feedback for students: Too much, to detailed or too incomprehensive to be effective? Bioscience Education 7(1): 1–16.
14.
HattieJTimperleyH (2007) The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research77(1): 81–112.
15.
HigginsRHartleyPSkeltonA (2001) Getting the message across: The problem of communicating assessment feedback. Teaching in Higher Education6(2): 269–274.
16.
HounsellD (2007) Towards more sustainable feedback to students. In: BoudDFalchikovN (eds) Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education. Learning for the Longer Term, London: Routledge, pp. 101–113.
17.
HounsellD (2008) The trouble with feedback. New challenges, emerging strategies. TLA Interchange2: 1–9.
18.
JohnstonBMitchellRMylesF (2012) Developing Student Criticality in Higher Education. Undergraduate Learning in the Arts and Social Sciences, London: Bloomsbury Academic.
19.
JollyBBoudD (2013) Written feedback. What is it good for and how can we do it well? In: BoudDMolloyE (eds) Feedback in Higher and Professional Education. Understanding and Doing It Well, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 104–124.
20.
KulhavyRW (1977) Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research47(1): 211–232.
21.
Leonardo Z (2016) Educational criticism as a new specialization. Research in Education 96(1): 87–92.
McCardle-ClintonD (2008) The Consumer Experience of Higher Education. The Rise of Capsule Education, London: Continuum.
24.
MaggsL (2014) A case study of staff and student satisfaction with assessment feedback at a small specialised higher education institution. Journal of Further and Higher Education38(1): 1–18.
25.
MolloyEBorrell-CarrióFEpsteinR (2013) The impact of emotions in feedback. In: BoudDMolloyE (eds) Feedback in Higher and Professional Education. Understanding and Doing It Well, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 50–71.
26.
NicolD (2010) From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education35(5): 501–517.
27.
NordensvärdJ (2011) The consumer metaphor versus the citizen metaphor: Different sets of roles for students. In: MolesworthMScullionRNixonE (eds) The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 157–169.
O’DonovanBRustCPriceM (2015) A scholarly approach to solving the feedback dilemma in practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education41(6): 938–949.
30.
PileS (1994) Masculinism, the use of dualistic epistemologies and third spaces. Antipode26(3): 255–277.
31.
PoulosAMahonyMJ (2008) Effectiveness of feedback: The students’ perspective. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education33(2): 143–154.
32.
PriceMHandleyKMillarJ (2010) Feedback: All that effort, but what is the effect?Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education35(3): 277–289.
33.
RaeAMCochraneDK (2008) Listening to students. How to make written assessment feedback useful. Active Learning in Higher Education9(3): 217–230.
34.
RustC (2000) An opinion piece. A possible student-centred assessment solution to some of the current problems of modular degree programmes. Active Learning in Higher Education1(2): 126–131.
35.
SadlerDR (2010) Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education35(5): 535–550.
SopinaEMcNeillR (2015) Investigating the relationship between quality, format and delivery of feedback for written assignments in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education40(5): 666–680.
38.
Staunaes D (2016) Notes on inventive methodologies and affirmative critiques of an affective edu-future. Research in Education 96(1): 62–70.
39.
TappJ (2015) Framing the curriculum for participation: A Bernsteinian perspective on academic literacies. Teaching in Higher Education20(7): 711–722.
40.
TarasM (2006) Do unto others or not: Equity in feedback for undergraduates. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education31(3): 365–377.
41.
WeaverMR (2006) Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education31(3): 379–394.
WilliamsJ (2011) Constructing consumption: What media representations reveal about today’s students. In: MolesworthMScullionRNixonE (eds) The Marketisation of Higher Education and the Student as Consumer, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 170–182.
44.
YorkeM (2001) Formative assessment and its relevance to retention. Higher Education Research and Development20(2): 115–126.
45.
Zimbardi K, Colthorpe K and Dekker A (2017) Are they using my feedback? The extent of students’ feedback use has a large impact on subsequent academic performance. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 42(4): 625–644.
