The theories and concepts outlined below indicate some of the key developments in feedback pedagogy from the 1970s to the present day. Within this time frame, research into feedback has placed increasing focus on the learner and on the outcomes for individuals, rather than upon the needs of the educator. As with the learning theories you encountered in other pages here, these theories and concepts do not exist in opposition to each other but, rather, represent multiple perspectives on similar themes.
Bloom et al.’s evaluation of student learning (1971)
Bloom was one of the first scholars to stress the importance of formative (during the course of instruction) as well as summative (at the end of a period of instruction) assessment of learning. Bloom advocates using formative classroom assessment to enable educators to differentiate between students. By assessing students’ abilities over a period of time, Bloom argues, educators can tailor input to individuals’ requirements. The aim of this approach is to improve overall outcomes by ensuring instruction is varied according to student needs. For Bloom, students must be given an opportunity to make mistakes in the classroom environment so that educators can point out issues that have been missed or require correction. These opportunities thus lead to improved summative outcomes.
Royce Sadler’s theory of assessment (1989)
For Royce Sadler, the key to effective learning was through the development of self-regulatory skills in students. In short, if students are asked (or expected) to reproduce answers or systems of thinking to then be judged by the assessor, the student remains depenedent on the assessor. The goal is to develop students that can make these judgements of the quality and effectiveness of their work.
Part of the assessment and feedback processes lies in the use of exemplars to facilitate learning – he theorises that students cannot understand how to perform a task effectively without being shown the intended end result. This approach involves more than just sharing example work with students, however; students need to understand exactly what is effective about a particular approach, and they must learn how to replicate it within their own assessments – in other words, they should be given time to work through exemplars and to make judgements about the content.
Consider an Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tool, which has only been trained using Shakespearian sonnets. When asked to write a poem, it will unsurprisingly produce a Shakespearian sonnet. The more data (poems) the GenAI is trained with the more sophisticated its rules (understanding) becomes of poetry. The same can be applied to our students. If only presented with a narrow range of examples, students will replicate these. They need to see a braod range of examples including poor examples which must be critically reviewed to develop the students understanding (rules) of what is and is not good/bad, acceptable/unacceptable, effective/ineffective, etc.
Royce Sadler’s theory also places particular emphasis on authenticity within assessment processes, which has become a hot topic in assessment literature in recent years. He stresses that exemplars should be genuine extracts of students’ work, rather than model answers generated by the educator, as this method will demonstrate what students are expected to accomplish, rather than showing them an ideal answer that may not be achievable. As part of this approach, Royce Sadler advocates that educators must offer students strategies which they can apply in order to modify or improve their own work.
NB: the literature on ‘authentic’ and ‘authenticity in assessment’ has come along way since 1989, inlcuding Sadler’s ideas which continue to lead the way. Authenticity is now considered in terms of what and how students apply their learning beyond the academic exercise. The use of exemplars is reasonably common practice in many classrooms, but we now explore and question our modes of assessment to ask ‘do we expect responses that are comparable, in compliance, or demonstrating uniformity in thinking or approach?’ or ‘do we expect our students to explore, discover, create?’
Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick’s principles of good feedback practice (2006)
Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick offer seven principles for the development of effective feedback. The first builds on Royce Sadler’s emphasis on understanding the intended outcome, arguing that feedback should help to make the goals or expected standards of the instruction clear. As such, educators need to make learning outcomes easy for students to understand. Second, feedback should enable students to assess their own performance and reflect on their learning; in other words, students should be involved in the process, taking an active role, rather than merely receiving feedback. Third, feedback should be of good quality, taking into account the assessment task and the needs of the student, and being neither too brief, nor too detailed.
Principles four and five consider the impact of feedback on the student, stressing that dialogue should be built into feedback processes and that this dialogic element should have a positive impact on students’ self-esteem in relation to learning. Such dialogue usually occurs between student and educator, but may also take place between peers.
Principle six relates to student development, emphasising that good feedback will enable learners to improve their performance. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick advocate the use of repeated assessment and resubmissions, as these enable students to make a direct comparison between levels of performance.
Finally, principle seven suggests that educators should also seek feedback from learners in order to improve their teaching, assessment and feedback practices, enabling continued refinement of course content, which should be based on the goal of improving learning outcomes.
Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick also guard against too strong an emphasis on summative assessment, suggesting that the achievement of overall learning goals (e.g. learning outcomes) should also be measured, not just one-off performance in an essay or exam.
Carless and Boud’s feedback literacy model (2018)
Carless and Boud elaborate the importance of ‘feedback literacy’: i.e. of students understanding the information they receive from educators and being able to take positive action as a result. For them, the main barrier to effective feedback is the risk of students misunderstanding the process for, and purpose of, the feedback they receive. To overcome this, educators should strive to create a trusting environment in which learners feel able to ask for feedback and are supported to develop their capabilities over time.
The researchers touch on strategies discussed elsewhere in feedback theory (e.g. use of exemplars and peer feedback) but place the focus upon using these methods to develop learners’ feedback literacy. For example, they recommend that students learn to judge the quality of other students’ work, a process which will help them to evaluate their own efficacy, too.
Finally, Carless and Boud emphasise the relevance of technologically enhanced feedback processes – e.g. online and video feedback – as well as stressing the importance of timely feedback, given at a point when the student can enact development and change, rather than after a course of learning is already finished. One way to overcome this issue is to offer feedback that has broad relevance over and above the requirements of one particular assignment, which students can then feed forward into future work.
NB: UK compulsory teachers have some very effective systems such as requiring students to respond to teacher feedback (using a different colour pen) beneath the teacher’s feedback, to which the teacher can offer further comments. Carless and Boud would be very pleased to see this. Unfortunately, this practice is not ubiquitous, and is often not continued into Higher Education. We encourage you to explore this approach where possible with your students and attempt to revive or repurpose this approach.
References
Bloom, B.S., Hastings, J.T. and Madaus, G.F. (1971) Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Carless, D. and Boud, D. (2018) ‘The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback’, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8) pp. 1315–1325.
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), pp. 199–218.
Royce Sadler, D. (1989) ‘Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems’, Instructional Science, 18, pp. 119–144.