Many students struggle with making sense of feedback information and in applying and transferring it to new contexts. Research literature suggests that low-performing students are especially at risk because they often do not understand assessment criteria and cannot utilise information they receive. This paper addresses this problem through investigating assessment processes which aim to support the influence of feedback on student improvement. It focusses on an empirical study of an undergraduate course at university level in which students resubmit assignments after having applied feedback information received on initial drafts. Such designs help educators to strengthen student improvement from feedback processes by engaging students directly with feedback comments and assessment criteria. Data from the designs enable comparison of improvements between low-performing versus high-performing students and shows that while all students improved, the gap between low-performers and their peers narrowed.
AgostinhoS. (2011). The use of a visual learning design representation to support the design process of teaching in higher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(6), 961–978. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.923
2.
AjjawiR.BoudD. (2017). Researching feedback dialogue: An interactional analysis approach. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(2), 252–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1102863
3.
AndradeH.DuY. (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600801928
4.
BjældeO. E.JørgensenT. H.LindbergA. B. (2017). Continuous assessment in higher education in Denmark: Early experiences from two science courses. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 12(23), 1–19.
5.
BasseyM. (1971). The assessment of students by formal assignments. New Zealand University Students Association.
6.
BearmanM.DawsonP.BoudD.BennettS.HallM.MolloyE. (2016). Support for assessment practice: Developing the Assessment Design Decisions Framework. Teaching in Higher Education, 21 (5), 545–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1160217
7.
BennettS.AgostinhoS.LockyerL.KostaL.JonesJ.KoperR.HarperB. (2007). Learning Designs: Bridging the gap between theory and practice. In AtkinsonR.McBeathC.KitA. S. S.CheersC. (Eds.), ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning: Proceedings of the 24th annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. (pp. 51–60). Nanyang Technological University.
8.
BoudD.MolloyE. (2013a). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.691462
9.
BoudD.MolloyE. (2013b). What is the problem with feedback? In BoudD.MolloyE. (Eds.), Feedback in higher and professional education: Understanding it and doing it well (pp. 1–10). Routledge.
BridgesP.CooperA.EvansonP.HainesC.JenkinsD.ScurryD.WoolfH.YorkeM. (2002). Coursework marks high, examination marks low: Discuss. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930120105045
12.
BroadbentJ.PanaderoE.BoudD. (2018). Implementing summative assessment with a formative flavour: A case study in a large class. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1343455
13.
CarlessD. (2015a). Excellence in university assessment. Routledge.
CarlessD. (2019). Feedback loops and the longer-term: Towards feedback spirals. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(5), 705–714. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1531108
16.
CarlessD.BoudD. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
17.
De GrezL.ValckeM.RoozenI. (2012). How effective are self- and peer assessment of oral presentation skills compared with teachers’ assessments?Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(2), 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787412441284
18.
DonovanP. (2014). Closing the feedback loop: physics undergraduates’ use of feedback comments on laboratory coursework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(8), 1017–1029. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.881979
19.
EsterhazyR.DamsaC. (2019). Unpacking the feedback process: An analysis of undergraduate students’ interactional meaning-making of feedback comments. Studies in Higher Education44(2), 260–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2017.1359249
20.
FraileJ.PanaderoE.PardoR. (2017). Co-creating rubrics: The effects on self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and performance of establishing assessment criteria with students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.03.003
21.
GibbsG.LucasL. (1997). Coursework assessment, class size and student performance: 1984–1994. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 21(2), 183–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877970210204
22.
GoncaY.GoncaE. (2012). Peer review versus teacher Feedback in process writing: How effective?International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 13, 33–48.
23.
HakeR. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64–74.
24.
HounsellD.McCuneV.HounsellJ.LitjensJ. (2008). The quality of guidance and feedback to students. Higher Education Research and Development, 27(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360701658765
25.
JensenL. X.BearmanM.BoudD. (2023). Characteristics of productive feedback encounters in online learning. Teaching in Higher Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2023.2213168
26.
McLeanA. J.BondC. H.NicholsonH. D. (2015). An anatomy of feedback: A phenomenographic investigation of undergraduate students’ conceptions of feedback. Studies in Higher Education, 40(5), 921–932. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.855718
27.
MutchA.YoungC.DaveyT.FitzgeraldL. (2018). A journey towards sustainable feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 248–259. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1332154
28.
NicolD. J. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602931003786559
29.
NicolD. J. (2021). The power of internal feedback: Exploiting natural comparison processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(5), 756–778. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1823314
30.
NicolD. J.Macfarlane-DickD. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good Feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
31.
NicolD. J.McCallumS. (2022). Making internal feedback explicit: Exploiting the multiple comparisons that occur during peer review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(3), 424–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1924620
32.
NicolD.ThomsonA.BreslinC. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102–122.
33.
PettyG. (2004). Teaching today: A practical guide (3rd ed.). Nelson Thomas.
34.
PittE. (2017). Students’ utilisation of Feedback: A cyclical model. In CarlessD.BridgesS.ChanC.GlofcheskiR. (Eds.), Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education (pp. 145–158). Springer.
35.
PittE.BearmanM.EsterhazyR. (2020). The conundrum of low achievement and Feedback for learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(2), 239–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1630363
36.
RichardsonJ. T. E. (2015). Coursework versus examinations in end-of-module assessment: A literature review. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(3), 439–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.919628
37.
SadlerD. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
38.
SadlerD. R. (2010). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 535–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903541015.
39.
SadlerD. R. (2015). Backwards assessment explanations: implications for teaching and assessment practice. In LeblerD.CareyG.HarrisonS. (Eds.), Assessment in music education: From policy to practice: Landscapes: The arts, aesthetics, and education (p. 16). Springer.
40.
ShieldsS. (2015). ‘My work is bleeding’: Exploring students’ emotional responses to first-year assignment feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(6), 614–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1052786.
SimoniteV. (2003). The impact of coursework on degree classifications and the performance of individual students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 459–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930301675
43.
SimonsmeierB. A.PeifferH.FlaigM.SchneiderM. (2020). Peer feedback improves students’ academic self-concept in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 61(6), 706–724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-020-09591-y
44.
TaiJ.AjjawiR.BoudD.DawsonP.PanaderoE. (2018). Developing evaluative judgement: Enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work. Higher Education, 76(3), 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3
45.
ToJ.PanaderoE.CarlessD. (2021). A systematic review of the educational uses and effects of exemplars. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(8), 1167–1182. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.2011134
46.
TrotterE. (2006). Student perceptions of continuous summative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(5), 505–521
47.
WinstoneN.BoudD. (2022). The need to disentangle assessment and feedback in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(3), 656–667. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1779687
48.
WinstoneN.CarlessD. (2020). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education. A learning-focused approach. Routledge.
49.
YorkeM.BridgesP.WoolfH. (2000). Mark distributions and marking practices in UK higher education: Some challenging issues. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1(1), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787400001001002
50.
ZimbardiK.ColthorpeK.DekkerA.EngstromC.BugarcicA.WorthyP.RubanV.ChunduriP.LlukaL.LongP. (2017). Are they using my feedback? The extent of students’ feedback use has a large impact on subsequent academic performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(4), 625–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1174187
51.
ZhuQ.CarlessD. (2018). Dialogue within peer feedback processes: Clarification and negotiation of meaning. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(4), 883–897. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1446417
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
