Read Between the Lines; the Emancipatory Nature of Formative Annotative Feedback on Draft Assignments

Systemic Practice and Action Research

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 453-466

  Regan, Paul John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Action research; Formative annotation feedback; Higher education; Nursing

Indexed keywords

EID: 78449311558     PISSN: 1094429X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11213-010-9168-2     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Ball E (2009a). Annotation an effective device for student feedback: a critical review of the literature. Nurse Educ in Practice 7(3): 295-307.
2. Ball E (2009b) A participatory action research study on handwritten annotation feedback and its impact on staff and students. Syst Pract Action Res 22: 111-124.
3. Ball E, Franks H, Jenkins J, McGrath M, Leigh J (2009) Annotation is a valuable tool to enhance learning and assessment in student essays. Nurse Educ Today 29: 284-291.
4. Bargal D (2006) Personal and intellectual influences leading to Lewin's paradigm of action research. Action Res 4(4): 367-388.
5. Barthes R (1964) Elements of semiology. Hill and Wang, New York.
6. Black P, William D (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assess Educ 5(1): 7-74.
7. Boud D (2007) Reframing assessment as if learning were important. In: Boud D, Falchikov N (eds) Rethinking assessment in higher education. Learning for the longer term. Routledge, London, pp 14-25.
8. Butler DL, Winne PH (1995) Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Rev Educ Res 65(3): 245-281.
9. Chanock K (2000) Comments on essays: do students understand what lecturers write? Teach High Educ 5(1): 95-105.
10. Cunningham JB (1993) Action research and organisational development. Praeger, London.
11. Dick B, Stringer E, Huxham C (2009) Theory in action research. Action Res 7(1): 5-12.
12. Duffy K (2003) Failing students: a qualitative study of factors that influence the decisions regarding assessment of students' competence in practice. Caledonian Nursing and Midwifery Research Centre, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Community Health, Glasgow Caledonian University.
13. Elton L, Johnston B (2002) Assessment in Universities: a critical review of research, LTSN Generic Centre. http://ltsnpsy. york. ac. uk/docs/pdf/p20030617_elton_johnston-assessment_in_universities_a_critical_view_o. pdf. Accessed 4 Jan 2010.
14. Feito A, Donahue P (2008) Minding the gap annotation as preparation for discussion. Arts Humanit High Educ 7(3): 295-307.
15. Freire P (1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Seabury Press, New York.
16. Handley K, Szwelnik A, Ujma D, Lawrence L, Millar J, Price M (2007) When less is more: students' experiences of assessment feedback, 1st July, 3rd Higher Education Academy annual conference, Engaging students in Higher Education. https://mw. brookes. ac. uk/download/attachments/2851502/HEA+paper+2007+-+Student+experiences+of+assessment+feedback. pdf?version=1. Accessed 12 Jan 2010.
17. Harlen W, Crick RD (2003) Testing and motivation for learning. Assess Educ 10(2): 169-207.
18. Higher Education Statistics Agency (2008) Performance indicators in higher education in the UK 2007/08. HESA. http://www. hesa. ac. uk/index. php?option=com_content& task=view& id=1446& Itemid=141. Accessed 4 Jan 2010.
19. Holter IM, Schwartz-Barcott D (1993) Action research: what is it? How has it been used and how can it be used in nursing? J Adv Nurs 18: 298-304.
20. Hyland P (2000) Learning from feedback on assessment. In: Booth A, Hyland P (eds) The practice of University history teaching. MUP, Manchester.
21. Jenkins J (2005) Guidelines for the annotation of formative and summative assessments. School of Nursing, University of Salford. http://intranet. nursing. salford. ac. uk/geninfo/quality/Guidelines%20for%20the%20Annotation%20of%20Formative%20and%20Summative%20Assessments. doc. Accessed 4 Jan 2010.
22. Johansson AW, Lindhult E (2008) Emancipation or workability? Critical versus pragmatic scientific orientation in action research. Action Res 6(1): 95-115.
23. Johnson M, Nádas R (2009) Marginalised behaviour: digital annotations, spatial encoding and the implications for reading comprehension. Learn Media Tech 34(4): 323-336.
24. Juwah C, Macfarlane-Dick D, Matthew B, Nicol D, Ross D, Smith B (2004) Enhancing student learning through effective formative feedback. http://www. palatine. ac. uk/files/919. pdf. Accessed 12 Jan 2010.
25. Kemmis S (2006) Participatory action research and the public sphere. Educ Action Res 14(4): 459-476.
26. Kemmis S, McTaggart R (2005) Participatory action research: communicative action and the public sphere. In: Denzin N, Lincoln Y (eds) The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 559-603.
27. Killingsworth MJ (1993) Product and process, literacy and orality: an essay on composition and culture. Coll Compos Commun 44(1): 26-39 (February).
28. Knight P (2006) The local practices of assessment. Assess Eval High Educ 31(4): 435-452.
29. Kristeva J (1986) The Kristeva reader. In: Toril Moi (ed), Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
30. Lewin K (1947a) Frontiers in group dynamics 1: concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Hum Rel 1(5): 5-41.
31. Lewin K (1947b) Frontiers in group dynamics 11: channels in group life: social planning and action research, concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Hum Rel 1: 143-153.
32. Lewin K (1951) Field theory in social science. Harper and Row, New York.
33. Liu K (2006) Annotation as an index to critical writing. Urban Educ 41: 192-207.
34. Marshall CM (1998a) The future of annotation in a digital (paper) world. Presented at the 35th annual GLSLIS clinic: successes and failures of digital libraries, June 20-24, University of Illinois, pp 1-20, March 24.
35. Marshall CM (1998b) Toward an ecology of hypertext annotation. Hypertext. In: proceedings of the ninth ACM conference on hypertext.
36. McColly W (1965) The dimensions of composition annotation. State University of New York Press, Oswego, NY.
37. McNiff J (2002) Action research for professional development; concise advice for new action researchers, 3rd edn. http://www. jeanmcniff. com/booklet1. html. Accessed 13 Jan 2010.
38. Nicol D, Macfarlane-Dick D (2006) Formative assessment and self regulated learning; a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Stud High Educ 3(2): 199-218.
39. Orsmond P, Merry S, Reiling K (2002) The use of formative feedback when using student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assess Eval High Educ 27(4): 309-323.
40. Paley J (2006) Evidence and expertise. Nurs Inq 13: 82-93.
41. Porter-O'Donnell C (2004) Beyond the yellow highlighter: teaching annotation skills to improve reading comprehension. English J 93: 5.
42. Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (2006) Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education. http://www. qaa. ac. uk/academicinfrastructure/codeofpractice/section6/draft/. Accessed 4 Jan 2010.
43. Race P (2001a) A briefing on self, paper and group assessment. Assessment series no. 9, LTSN.
44. Race P (2001b) Assessment: a guide for students. LTSN, York.
45. Robson C (2002) Real world research, 2nd edn. Blackwell publishing, Oxford.
46. Sadler DR (1983) Evaluation and the improvement of academic learning. J High Educ 54(1): 60-79.
47. Sadler DR (1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instr Sci 18: 119-144.
48. Small SA (1995) Action-oriented research: models and methods. J Marriage Family 57(4): 941-955.
49. Somekh B, Zeichner K (2009) Action research for educational reform: remodelling action research theories and practices in local contexts. Educ Action Res 17(1): 5-21.
50. Stenhouse L (1975) An introduction to curriculum research and development. Heinemann, London.
51. Sutherland K (1997) Introduction. In: Sutherland K (ed) Electronic text: investigations in method and theory. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
52. Torrance H, Pryor J (1998) Investigating formative assessment; teaching, learning and assessment in the classroom. Open Univ Press, Philadelphia, PA.
53. Winter R, Munn-Giddings C (2001) A handbook for action research in health and social care. Taylor and Francis Ltd, New York.
54. Wolfe JL (2002) Marginal pedagogy: how annotated texts affect writing-from-source text. Writ Comm 19(2): 297-333.
55. Wolfe JL, Nuewirth CM (2001) From the margins to the centre: the future of annotation. J Bus Tech Commun 15(3): 333-371.
56. Yorke M (2003) Formative assessment in higher education: moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. High Educ 45(4): 477-501.