What is Feedback? Connecting Student Perceptions to Assessment Practices

• Published in: 2013 Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTiCE) pp. 106 - 113
• Main Authors: Pears, A., Harland, J., Hamilton, M., Hadgraft, R.
• Format: Conference Proceeding
• Language: English
• Published: IEEE 01.03.2013
• Subjects: Australia; Computer architecture; Context; Educational institutions; Engineering; Feedback; Feeds; Seminars; Tertiary Education
• ISBN: 1467356271; 9781467356275
• DOI: 10.1109/LaTiCE.2013.36

This paper reports outcomes from an international study examining student perceptions of feedback. Recent work by Grahame Gibbs identifies linkages between current and subsequent course activities as a critical factor in whether students value the feedback they receive. We have investigated the frequency and nature of feedback given to students in two large introductory course settings in engineering and computing in Australia and Sweden and contrasted this with student perceptions of the quality of feedback they received. Data analysed includes audits of levels of verbal and written feedback on assignment work returned to students, and an exploration of student attitudes to feedback in the context of the questions asked in course evaluation questionnaires. Drawing on the work of Gibbs on feedback, and Biggs on constructive alignment we propose four principles for achieving student relevant course feedback. The paper uses these principles as a framework with which to deconstruct and analyse the feedback processes and learning activities of the 2012 versions of the two target courses. The analysis demonstrates that several key principles have been violated. We also discuss how new learning activities could be designed and evaluated to address the concerns we have identified. The results highlight the contextual nature of how feedback is perceived and valued by learners. This provides useful practical guidelines to academics wishing to optimise the value of feedback to students, and minimise wasted effort associated with giving types of feedback that have little value for learners, and which consequently often remain unread.