Student perceptions of assessment feedback: a critical scoping review and call for research

Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2021, Pages 345-373

  Van der Kleij, Fabienne M ^a,b   Lipnevich, Anastasiya A ^c  

^a AUSTRALIAN CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^c CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Feedback; Methodology; Performance; Scoping review; Student perceptions

Indexed keywords

EID: 85089538468     PISSN: 18748597     EISSN: 18748600     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11092-020-09331-x     Document Type: Review

References (80)

1. Alqassab, M., & Panadero, E. (2020). Peer assessment. In S. M. Brookhart (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of education. New York: Routledge.
2. Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice, 8, 19–32. 10.1080/1364557032000119616. DOI: 10.1080/1364557032000119616
3. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213–238. 10.3102/00346543061002213. DOI: 10.3102/00346543061002213
4. Bayerlein, L. (2014). Students’ feedback preferences: how do students react to timely and automatically generated assessment feedback? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 916–931. 10.1080/02602938.2013.870531. DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2013.870531
5. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5, 7–74. 10.1080/0969595980050102. DOI: 10.1080/0969595980050102
6. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5–31. 10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5. DOI: 10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
7. Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment (UCLA-CSIEP), 1(2), 1–12.
8. Bradley, M. T., & Gupta, R. D. (1997). Estimating the effect of the file drawer problem in meta-analysis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 85(2), 719–722. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1997.85.2.719
9. Brown, G. (2011). Self-regulation of assessment beliefs and attitudes: a review of the students’ conceptions of assessment inventory. Educational Psychology, 31, 731–748. 10.1080/01443410.2011.599836. DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2011.599836
10. Brown, G. T. L., & Harris, L. R. (2018). Methods in feedback research. In A. Lipnevich & J. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback (Cambridge handbooks in psychology) (pp. 97–120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316832134.021. DOI: 10.1017/9781316832134.021
11. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245–281. 10.3102/00346543065003245. DOI: 10.3102/00346543065003245
12. *Carless, D. (2006) Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education 31, 219–233. doi:10.1080/03075070600572132 DOI: 10.1080/03075070600572132
13. Carless, D. (2016). Feedback as dialogue. Encyclopedia of educational philosophy and theory, 1–6.
14. *Chanock, K. (2000). Comments on essays: do students understand what tutors write? Teaching in Higher Education, 5, 95–105. doi:10.1080/135625100114984 DOI: 10.1080/135625100114984
15. *Clark-Gordon, C. V., Bowman, N. D., Watts, E. R., Banks, J.Knight, J. M. (2018). “As good as your word”: face-threat mitigation and the use of instructor nonverbal cues on students’ perceptions of digital feedback, Communication Education, 67, 206–225. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2018.1428759
16. Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New York: Addison Wesley.
17. *Crimmins, G., Nash, G., Oprescu, F., Liebergreen, M., Turley, J., Bond, R., Dayton, J. (2016). A written, reflective and dialogic strategy for assessment feedback that can enhance student/teacher relationships. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41, 141–153. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.986644
18. *Douglas, T., Salter, S., Iglesias, M., Dowlman, M., & Eri, R. (2016). The feedback process: perspectives of first and second year undergraduate students in the disciplines of education, health science and nursing. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 13(1). Retrieved from: http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol13/iss1/3
19. *Eva, K. W., Armson, H., Holmboe, E., Lockyer, J., Loney, E., Mann, K.Sargeant, J. (2012). Factors influencing responsiveness to feedback: on the interplay between fear, confidence, and reasoning processes. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 17, 15–26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9290-7
20. Evans, J. S. B. (2010). Intuition and reasoning: a dual-process perspective. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 313–326. 10.1080/1047840X.2010.521057. DOI: 10.1080/1047840X.2010.521057
21. *Evans, C.Waring, M. (2011). Student teacher assessment feedback preferences: the influence of cognitive styles and gender. Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 171–109. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.011
22. Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: an introduction (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
23. *Gamlem, S. M.Smith, K. (2013). Student perceptions of classroom feedback. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20, 150–169. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2012.749212
24. Goetz, T., Bieg, M., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Hall, N. C. (2013). Do girls really experience more anxiety in mathematics? Psychological Science, 24, 2079–2087. 10.1177/0956797613486989. DOI: 10.1177/0956797613486989
25. Goetz, T., Lipnevich, A., Krannich, M., & Gogol, K. (2018). Performance feedback and emotions. In A. Lipnevich & J. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback (Cambridge handbooks in psychology) (pp. 554–574). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316832134.027. DOI: 10.1017/9781316832134.027
26. Goetz, T., Pekrun, R., Hall, N., & Haag, L. (2006). Academic emotions from a social-cognitive perspective: antecedents and domain specificity of students’ affect in the context of Latin instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 289–308. 10.1348/000709905X42860. DOI: 10.1348/000709905X42860
27. Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2012). An introduction to systematic reviews. London: Sage.
28. Guskey, T. (2018). Feedback, correctives, and the use of pre-assessments. In A. Lipnevich & J. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback (Cambridge handbooks in psychology) (pp. 432–450). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316832134.021. DOI: 10.1017/9781316832134.021
29. Handley, K., Price, M., & Millar, J. (2011). Beyond “doing time”: investigating the concept of student engagement with feedback. Oxford Review of Education, 37, 543–560. 10.1080/03054985.2011.604951. DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2011.604951
30. Hargreaves, E. (2011). Teachers’ feedback to pupils: “like so many bottles thrown out to sea”? In R. Berry & B. Adamson (Eds.), Assessment reform in education: policy and practice (pp. 121–133). Dordrecht: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-0729-0_9
31. *Hargreaves, E. (2013). Inquiring into children’s experiences of teacher feedback: reconceptualising assessment for learning. Oxford Review of Education, 39, 229–246. doi:10.1080/03054985.2013.787922 DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2013.787922
32. *Harris, L. R., Brown, G. T. L., & Harnett, J. A. (2014). Understanding classroom feedback practices: a study of New Zealand student experiences, perceptions, and emotional responses. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26, 107–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-013-9187-5
33. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.
34. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112. 10.3102/003465430298487. DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487
35. *Havnes, A., Smith, K., Dysthe, O., & Ludvigsen, K. (2012). Formative assessment and feedback: making learning visible. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 38, 21–27. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2012.04.001
36. Higher Education Funding Council for England. (2016). National student survey results 2016. Retrieved from http:// www.hefce.ac.uk/lt/nss/results/2016/
37. Joanna Briggs Institute. (2015). The Joanna Briggs institute reviewers’ manual 2015: Methodology for JBI scoping reviews (pp. 1–24). Joanne Briggs Institute.
38. Jonsson, A. (2013). Facilitating productive use of feedback in higher education. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14, 63–76. 10.1177/1469787412467125. DOI: 10.1177/1469787412467125
39. Jonsson, A., & Panadero, E. (2018). Facilitating students’ active engagement with feedback. In A. Lipnevich & J. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback (Cambridge handbooks in psychology) (pp. 531–553). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316832134.026. DOI: 10.1017/9781316832134.026
40. Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697–720. 10.1037/0003-066X.58.9.697. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.9.697
41. *King, P. E., Schrodt, P., & Weisel, J. J. (2009). The Instructional Feedback Orientation Scale: conceptualizing and validating a new measure for assessing perceptions of instructional feedback. Communication Education, 58, 235–261. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520802515705
42. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284. 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
43. Levinsson, M., & Prøitz, T. S. (2017). The (non-)use of configurative reviews in education. Education Inquiry, 8, 209–231. 10.1080/20004508.2017.1297004. DOI: 10.1080/20004508.2017.1297004
44. Lipnevich, A. A., Berg, D. A. G., & Smith, J. K. (2016). Toward a model of student response to feedback. In G. T. L. Brown & L. R. Harris (Eds.), The handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 169–185). New York: Routledge.
45. *Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2009). ‘I really need feedback to learn:’ students’ perspectives on the effectiveness of the differential feedback messages. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 347–367. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-009-9082-2.
46. Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (Eds.). (2018). The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47. *Mahfoodh, O. H. A., & Pandian, A. (2011). A qualitative case study of EFL students’ affective reactions to and perceptions of their teachers’ written feedback. English Language Teaching, 4(3), 14–25.
48. *McGrath, A. L. Taylor, A., Pychyl, T. A. (2011). Writing helpful feedback: the influence of feedback type on students’ perceptions and writing performance. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 5. doi: https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2011.2.5
49. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2007). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
50. Mory, E. H. (1996). Feedback research. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 919–956). New York, NY: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
51. *Murtagh, L. (2014). The motivational paradox of feedback: teacher and student perceptions. The Curriculum Journal, 25, 516–541. doi:10.1080/09585176.2014.944197 DOI: 10.1080/09585176.2014.944197
52. *Mustafa, R. F. (2012). Feedback on the feedback: sociocultural interpretation of Saudi ESL learners’ opinions about writing feedback. English Language Teaching, 5, 3–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n3p3
53. *Nguyen, H. T., & Filipi, A. (2018). Multiple-draft/multiple-party feedback practices in an EFL tertiary writing course: teachers’ and students’ perspectives. International Education Studies, 11. doi: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v11n8p1
54. Nicol, D. (2013). Resituating feedback from the reactive to the proactive. In D. Boud & E. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in higher and professional education (pp. 34–49). London: Routledge.
55. Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2006). How the group affects the mind: a cognitive model of idea generation in groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 186–213. 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_1. DOI: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_1
56. Nijstad, B. A., Stroebe, W., & Lodewijkx, H. F. (2003). Production blocking and idea generation: does blocking interfere with cognitive processes? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 531–548. 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00040-4. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00040-4
57. Panadero, E. (2016). Is it safe? Social, interpersonal, and human effects of peer assessment: a review and future directions. In G. T. L. Brown & L. R. Harris (Eds.), Handbook of social and human conditions in assessment (pp. 247–266). New York: Routledge.
58. Paulus, P. B., & Yang, H. (2000). Idea generation in groups: a basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 76–87. 10.1006/obhd.2000.2888. DOI: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2888
59. Peters, M., Godfrey, C., Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Parker, D., & Baldini Soares, C. (2015). Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13, 141–146. 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050. DOI: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050
60. Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide. Malden: Blackwell. DOI: 10.1002/9780470754887
61. Pham, M. T., Rajić, A., Greig, J. D., Sargeant, J. M., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. A. (2014). A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research Synthesis Methods, 5, 371–385. 10.1002/jrsm.1123. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1123
62. *Pitt, E., & Winstone, N. (2018). The impact of anonymous marking on students’ perceptions of fairness, feedback and relationships with lecturers. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43, 1183–1193. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1437594
63. Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching. (2017). 2016 Student experience survey national report. https://www.qilt.edu.au/docs/default-source/gos-reports/2017/2016-ses-national-report-final.pdf?sfvrsn=14e0e33c_
64. *Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., Klieme, E., Blum, W., & Hochweber, J. (2013). Written feedback in mathematics: mediated by students’ perception, moderated by goal orientation. Learning and Instruction, 27, 63–73. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.03.002
65. Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28, 4–13. 10.1002/bs.3830280103. DOI: 10.1002/bs.3830280103
66. Raosoft (2017), Accessed 18 October 2019, retrieved from [online] http://www.raosoft.com
67. Roseman, I. J., Antoniou, A. A., & Jose, P. E. (1996). Appraisal determinants of emotions: constructing a more accurate and comprehensive theory. Cognition and Emotion, 10, 241–277. 10.1080/026999396380240. DOI: 10.1080/026999396380240
68. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119–144. 10.1007/BF00117714. DOI: 10.1007/BF00117714
69. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153–189. 10.3102/0034654307313795. DOI: 10.3102/0034654307313795
70. Smith, & Lipnevich. (2018). Instructional feedback: analysis, synthesis, and extrapolation. In A. Lipnevich & J. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback (Cambridge handbooks in psychology) (pp. 591–604). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316832134.021. DOI: 10.1017/9781316832134.021
71. Smits, M., Boon, J., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., & Van Gog, T. (2008). Content and timing of feedback in a web-based learning environment: effects on learning as a function of prior knowledge. Interactive Learning Environments, 16, 183–193. 10.1080/10494820701365952. DOI: 10.1080/10494820701365952
72. Thomson Reuters Endnote X7. (2013). Clarivate Analytics Endnote (version X7). [Computer software]. Philadelphia, PA: Clarivate Analytics Available from https://endnote.com/downloads/.
73. Torrance, H. (2012). Formative assessment at the crossroads: conformative, deformative and transformative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 38, 323–342. 10.1080/03054985.2012.689693. DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2012.689693
74. Van der Kleij, F. M., & Adie, L. E. (2020). Towards effective feedback: an investigation of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of oral feedback. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. Advance online publication. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2020.1748871.
75. Van der Kleij, F. M., Adie, L. E., & Cumming, J. J. (2019). A meta-review of the student role in feedback. International Journal of Educational Research, 98, 303–323. 10.1016/j.ijer.2019.09.005. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijer.2019.09.005
76. Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C. W., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85, 475–511. 10.3102/0034654314564881. DOI: 10.3102/0034654314564881
77. Wellington, J. (2010). More than a matter of cognition: an exploration of affective writing problems of post-graduate students and their possible solutions. Teaching in Higher Education, 15, 135–150. 10.1080/13562511003619961. DOI: 10.1080/13562511003619961
78. White, H. D. (1994). Scientific communication and literature retrieval. In H. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 41–55). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
79. Wiliam, D. (2019). Some reflections on the role of evidence in improving education. Educational Research and Evaluation, 1, 127–139. 10.1080/13803611.2019.1617993. DOI: 10.1080/13803611.2019.1617993
80. Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017). Supporting learners’ agentic engagement with feedback: a systematic review and a taxonomy of recipience processes. Educational Psychologist, 52, 17–37. 10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538. DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538