This article discusses the importance of dissecting feedback and the student’s interaction with such to determine the benefit provided by specific feedback tools. The authors first establish the importance of conversational feedback, in which students can both understand and reject, if necessary, the feedback offered by their teacher. Such a technique should offer students a semblance of classroom agency, which encourages a partnership between teachers and their students so there exists reciprocity of feedback. The authors then goes on to note that a spectrum of feedback exists (12 types), which should be judiciously used in both evaluative and descriptive manners to evoke the most meaningful conversations from their student body. In varying subjects—which this article displays by offering evidence from STEM, English, and athletic perspectives—students tended to offer different responses after question prompting offered by the teacher. This is, in part, due to the dispositions of the students engaging with the feedback, but those in STEM were noted to respond with fewer words rather than with a dialog. English Studies students, on the other hand, were quicker to note areas of improvement within their work, thus allowing a dialog to flow between teacher the student. Due to the importance of this dialogic element, the authors conclude with the recommendation that feedback typologies cannot be fixed and thus should follow the idiosyncrasies that conversations oftentimes offer. 

Annotation contributed by Christina Wyatt, 2021-2023 CEL Student Scholar

The literature review included in this article supports innovative and frequent feedback for yielding substantial learning gains. After a theoretical analysis of the nature of feedback, the article treats formative assessment and models that may improve feedback practices. Student perceptions regarding self-assessment practices are also addressed. The article may assist faculty with creating or revising formative and student self-assessment practices. [Annotation contributed by Aaron Trocki] 

Models of assessment that students experience in higher education do not reflect modes of assessment experienced after college in a learning society. Boud recommends sustainable assessment practices that address learning goals of higher education courses along with preparing students for their own assessment needs in the future. This two–pronged approach to assessment will assist faculty in reconsidering the models traditionally employed. [Annotation contributed by Aaron Trocki] 

In higher education, the measurement perspective of assessment has historically been assumed and used to guide practice. The authors advocate for a new practice perspective of assessment that extends ideas from practice theory. Benefits of this practice perspective include infusing assessment into teaching and learning as opposed to separating assessment from teaching and learning. The recommendation of assessments for learning can work to reposition assessment within teaching and learning practices. [Annotation contributed by Aaron Trocki] 

This article explores the educative potential and challenges around producing student feedback. Two models of feedback are addressed and contrasted. In the first model, the instructor drives the feedback, but in the second model, students and instructors are integral to the feedback production process. The authors explain the benefits of the latter model, which include making students reflective assessors of their own learning. This feedback practice may help students sustain reflective assessment practice in subsequent learning. [Annotation contributed by Aaron Trocki] 

The learning-oriented assessment project worked to develop and promote assessment practices that promote student learning. In learning-oriented assessment, formative and summative assessment combine and treat assessment tasks as learning tasks; promote student involvement in assessment; and utilize closed feedback loops. Barriers include accountability and distrust and need to be addressed while promoting learning-oriented assessment. [Annotation contributed by Aaron Trocki] 

This proceeding addresses the design of informal learning spaces and how these might be adapted to promote a “casual” understanding of the emerging technology of artificial intelligence (AI). This work contains an early definition of AI-literacy, the ability to understand, use, monitor, and critically reflect on AI applications, and is helpful to assess the role of AI in teaching and learning. This working definition assists stakeholders in higher education with how to best integrate AI applications such as chatbots into models of assessment and feedback. [Annotation contributed by Aaron Trocki] 

This article reports on a survey of higher education faculty regarding barriers and enablers to diversifying assessment practices. Faculty perceptions regarding student choice in assessment are emphasized. Faculty perceived student choice as leading to empowering students and accommodating the learning of diverse students. Barriers to diversifying assessment practices are discussed along with recommendations for further research. [Annotation contributed by Aaron Trocki] 

This article shares research on higher education faculties’ beliefs and perceptions about assessment. Surveys were used to along three criteria of learning-oriented assessment, authentic learning tasks, and self- and peer assessment. Results revealed that authentic learning tasks occurred at a low rate, teachers have conflicting views about the use of feedback, and that students have limited involvement in assessment strategies. The author gives recommendations for professional leaning towards authentic assessment. [Annotation contributed by Aaron Trocki] 

Ryan explores formative and summative feedback styles alongside the importance of language to implore further discussion on the matter. Ryan begins by delineating the importance of emphasizing formative and summative feedback to students, which involves the assessment of learning prior to and after assessments. While formative assessments can take the shape of peer-to-peer feedback as well as self-feedback, a summative assessment would typically take the form of an exam. Ryan then further delves into the nuance that comes with self and peer-to-peer feedback to highlight the importance of student agency. She mentions establishing class norms to create a sense of trust in her students before implementing a critique system, as oftentimes individuals, especially musicians, tend to take criticism as a personal offense rather than a performance growth opportunity. She mentioned highlighting what went well in a performance prior to discussion of what could have been improved and, to improve the quality of discussion in a peer setting, using a word-bank system to highlight important vocabulary that offers intrinsic growth opportunity. Lastly, Ryan discusses how feedback can come in many shapes and forms beyond verbal as different learning styles oftentimes require differences in feedback approach. 

Annotation contributed by Christina Wyatt, 2021-2023 CEL Student Scholar

Svanes and Skagen discuss benefits that Didaktik, feedback research, and classroom research could garner if used in tandem with each other. Didaktik is a Swedish tradition that underlines the importance of a teacher’s professional autonomy alongside the importance of creating feedback that matches with the subject matter and the pupils involved. Svanes and Skagen go on to argue that a focus on language-based intentionality is too narrow of a lens to fully understand what is happening in the classroom. Didaktik instead focuses on what qualities the teacher uses when giving feedback. To further this idea, its mentioned that a student’s learning is subject to the presentation of the teacher, thus the outcome of such cannot be fixed in advance. This means that students may not understand what the teacher attempts to convey, which can sometimes boil down to classroom context. The authors provide an extended example, focused on guided reading.

Annotation contributed by Christina Wyatt, 2021-2023 CEL Student Scholar

In this piece, the effectiveness of feedback strategies are tested to determine what styles of feedback genuinely provide the most support to students. The journal article begins by discussing the merit of using explanations in place of simple corrective feedback in a timely manner to the interception of the issue. Alongside this concept, it was recommended that teachers profile their students to determine how one might go about receiving, perceiving, interpreting, and understanding the information presented to them. Such is important given that feedback is only as powerful as a student’s perception of it, in which case students oftentimes refuse to utilize the feedback received. To offer a unique perspective away from surveys, this journal used oral classroom feedback alongside video-stimulated recall to gather perceptions of feedback within one-on-one conversations to provide a time for reflection and correction. The results concluded that 30% of teacher feedback is not recognized by students, and further that around 30% of the feedback recognized was interpreted as per the teacher’s intention.  

 Annotation contributed by Christina Wyatt, 2021-2023 CEL Student Scholar