Feedback

Boud and Molloy (2012) describe feedback as a process through which the learner obtains information about their work to identify similarities and differences between the standards for the task and the qualities of their own work, enabling them to produce higher-quality outcomes. This definition highlights three key points:

1. Feedback is seen as a process and not simply as information received.
2. The learner’s role in seeking information is emphasised, implying that receiving feedback is not passive.
3. Feedback is not merely information about performance; it also serves as a tool for improvement in subsequent similar or more complex tasks.

Traditional feedback, often consisting of written or verbal comments on student’s assigned tasks, has long been beneficial for both university students and their instructors. However, it comes with certain limitations alongside its advantages:

• Feedback is commonly provided on coursework assignments but rarely on crucial end-of-semester or end-of-year exams, which significantly impact overall grades (Hounsell et al., 2007).
• Teachers’ feedback typically centers on whether a student’s work meets specific criteria and standards, but for students whose submissions fall short, these comments may not directly illustrate what exemplary work entails. Yet, understanding what constitutes excellent work is vital for interpreting and applying feedback effectively (Sadler, 1989).
• Feedback in higher education usually occurs after the completion of the assessed work, which can be unsettling for first-year students accustomed to ongoing support throughout the assignment process in previous educational settings (Beaumont et al., 2011).

Formative Feedback

Formative feedback represents information communicated to the learner that is intended to modify the learner’s thinking or behaviour for the purpose of improving learning. Information within the feedback may address the accuracy of a response to a problem or task and may additionally touch on particular errors and misconceptions, with the latter representing more specific or elaborated types of feedback (Azevedo & Bernard, 1995; Birenbaum & Tatsuoka, 1987; Cheng, Lin, Chen, & Heh, 2005; Cohen, 1985; Kulhavy, 1977; Sales, 1993; Sleeman, Kelly, Martinak, Ward, & Moore, 1989).

To be effective, formative feedback should permit the comparison of actual performance with some established standard of performance (Johnson & Johnson, 1993). The definition of formative feedback may be further refined as multidimensional, non-evaluative, supportive, learner-controlled, timely, specific, credible, infrequent, contingent, and genuine (e.g., Brophy, 1981; Schwartz & White, 2000).

Collective Feedback

Collective feedback offers a practical solution for situations where academics lack the time to provide one-on-one feedback, such as when managing large groups of students or facing time constraints. This method is often used to provide more detailed and elaborate comments, for example, by addressing common misconceptions, comparing or discussing alternative approaches, or reviewing exemplary and less effective examples.

One major advantage of collective feedback is that students can learn from their peers’ work, gaining a broader perspective on what is expected. This approach encourages students to critically compare their work to others, ultimately helping them develop the ability to provide constructive self-feedback. For some students, comparing their work with that of peers may initially feel challenging, but group feedback is generally perceived as less intimidating than individual feedback.

However, a disadvantage of collective feedback is that it does not address individual mistakes or questions, making it less tailored to each student’s needs. As a result, many students prefer one-on-one feedback. Nevertheless, the overarching goal of education is to equip students with the skills to work independently, develop self-critical abilities, and learn to effectively respond to feedback from both experts and peers.

Exemplars, Model Answers and Past Questions

Sadler (1989) contended that for students to effectively use feedback, they must possess a solid understanding of what qualifies as outstanding work within a subject, at a specific academic level.

As defined by Huxham (2007), a model answer is an ideal, tutor-generated response to a question that would receive 100% of the marks, and which is made available to all of the students involved in an assessment. Model answers are usually crafted by teachers. Huxham sees various advantages in model answers:

• They can be given much more quickly than individual comments
• They do not involve personal comments from the teacher (avoiding dangers of negative feedback)
• They require some active engagement of the student who needs to read his/her work and to compare it with the model answer given
• They can be explicitly linked to marking criteria and learning objectives.

Huxham (2007) suggests that model answers are most effective when paired with individual feedback comments.

Unlike model answers, exemplars are genuine examples of students’ work that demonstrate what peers can realistically achieve rather than presenting an unattainable standard of perfection. According to Sadler (2002), exemplars convey messages that other methods cannot, as they not only tell students what constitutes excellence but also show them. Furthermore, exemplars are typically diverse, offering a range of examples that illustrate high-quality work. This variety helps address concerns from teachers that providing only a single model answer or exemplar of excellence might encourage mindless imitation rather than thoughtful emulation (Hounsell, 2008).

Handley and Williams (2009) found that students are highly receptive to exemplars.

Feedforward Feedback

Feedback, including examples, is often provided after an exam or after an assignment has been submitted. However, it can also be offered before an activity, a process known as “feedforward.”

In undergraduate education, feedback is typically retrospective and indirectly linked to future actions. Assignments and assessments are often concentrated toward the end of semesters, making it difficult for students to determine when and where feedback can be effectively applied. As a result, even high-quality feedback may have a limited impact. By contrast, postgraduate research supervision frequently involves ongoing feedback on drafts, such as research designs, analyses of emerging findings, or developing thesis chapters. These iterative comments directly shape refinements and revisions, creating a “feedforward” effect.

To address the limitations of retrospective feedback, some undergraduate courses have implemented “feedforward assignments” that establish a clear connection between diagnosis and remedial action. These assignments typically involve a recursive “feedback loop,” where students submit a draft, receive comments, revise their work, and resubmit it. Drafts can take various forms, including complete or nearly complete assignments, initial outlines or plans, extended summaries, or opening pages.

Feedforward assignments offer students the benefit of low-stakes practice on assessable work while providing actionable feedback to enhance subsequent formal assessments. However, these assignments may require earlier deadlines, which can be challenging for students managing other commitments. To address this, participation is often optional rather than mandatory. For instance, in two examples of feedforward assignments, approximately half of the students opted to submit drafts for feedback (Covic and Jones, 2008; Prowse et al., 2007).

Online Feedback

Another way of giving feedback can include the use of technology such as online feedback. Online feedback is immediate, and can be accessed by students at the time of their choosing. While the main type of question used tends to be multiple choice, it is also possible to design short-answer questions (Jordan & Mitchell, 2009).

Rubrics

A rubric is a structured tool that outlines the criteria for assessing an assignment or task, often with specific levels of performance described for each criterion. Assessment and feedback pro formas, often referred to as “cover sheets” or “assignment attachments,” are widely used to provide structured and standardised feedback to students (Hounsell et al., 2007). These tools, commonly in the form of rubrics, offer several key benefits:

• Alignment with Assessment Criteria: Rubrics link feedback directly to assessment criteria, helping markers maintain focus and ensure consistent evaluation across multiple assignments. Students benefit by clearly understanding how comments and ratings correspond to the criteria.
• Consistency Across Course Teams: When all markers use the same rubric, consistency in marking and feedback is improved, ensuring fairness and uniformity across the course.
• Balanced Feedback: Combining ratings and written comments allows markers to provide feedback that is both comprehensive and concise, balancing breadth with depth.
• Progress Monitoring: Rubrics enable students and teachers to track progress over time by identifying strengths and areas for improvement across a series of assignments, facilitating targeted efforts to address gaps.

Rubrics not only streamline the feedback process for educators but also enhance students’ ability to interpret and apply feedback effectively, promoting continuous learning and improvement.