Introduction
Reforms in universities are appearing in various forms that aim to contribute to the quality of learning and teaching. In the pursuit of efforts to enhance student learning, paying attention to feedback is one aspect that plays a central role in understanding the relationship between student progress and achievement (Bandura, Reference Bandura1991; Fedor, Reference Fedor1991; Weaver, Reference Weaver2006; Espasa & Meneses, Reference Espasa and Meneses2010). Feedback on learning from students and teachers is also one of the key areas of concern for New Zealand (NZ) universities as reported in recent research (VUW, 2009). Students are paying customers of tertiary institutions (Driscoll & Wicks, Reference Driscoll and Wicks1998; Pitman, Reference Pitman2000; Maringe, Reference Maringe2006; Molesworth, Nixon, & Scullion, Reference Molesworth, Nixon and Scullion2009). Although there is an ongoing debate on whether students should be treated as customers (Svenson & Wood, Reference Svenson and Wood2007; Ramachandran, Reference Ramachandran2010), part of their demands for quality education is receiving feedback for assessments and coursework. Also, in recent times, much emphasis has been made to shift from teacher to student-centred learning (Rust, Reference Rust2002). Emphasis on student-centred learning is part of the global quality movement that seeks to address accountability in all aspects of higher learning (Leckey & Neill, Reference Leckey and Neill2001). One aspect of the quality accountability by universities is the quality of feedback that is given through formative assessments. In a recent empirical study, Retna, Chong, and Cavana (Reference Retna, Chong and Cavana2009) also emphasised the importance of feedback to student satisfaction and learning in tutorials.
According to Cross (Reference Cross1996), students, regardless of the subject discipline, need feedback from their assessments in order to know about their accomplishment and how close they are towards their learning goals. Although assessment designs vary from one learning institution to another, they are used for two purposes: first, to engage students to produce work that reflects their in-depth learning and understanding of concepts/topic over a period of time; and, second, to avoid regurgitation of factual information that is so evident in examination (Gibbs, Reference Gibbs2006).
Mindful of these two purposes, this paper briefly reviews the literature on feedback and its importance in relation to student learning. A conceptual model is developed based on this literature review. Next, an empirical survey of undergraduate management students at an NZ university is outlined. This is followed by a quantitative analysis of the students’ perceptions on feedback. Four themes emerge from this analysis: improvement of work quality, improvement of results, need for feedback and quality of feedback. A qualitative analysis based on these themes is then undertaken. Finally, some concluding comments are provided.
Literature review
One feature of the constructivist paradigm explains that individuals construct their own meaning and knowledge by actively engaging in the learning process. This construction of knowledge by individuals is further supported by Vygotsky (Reference Vygotsky1978: 86), who claims that individuals’ knowledge construction can be further expanded and improved under the guidance of capable adults or peers. In universities, lecturers or tutors assume the role of providing guidance to students through the means of feedback in formative assessments. The importance of carefully well-planned feedback that aims to improve student learning has been documented by several studies (Sadler, Reference Sadler1989; Falchikov, Reference Falchikov1995; Stefani, Reference Stefani1998; Weaver, Reference Weaver2006).
Many definitions of feedback exist and numerous interpretations explain the importance and complexity involved in understanding what the term feedback means to academics in higher education. Taking a general or a broad perspective, feedback is defined as ‘all dialogue to support learning in both formal and informal situations’ (Askew & Lodge, Reference Askew and Lodge2000). A more specific definition in terms of understanding learning is given by Ramaprasad (Reference Ramaprasad1983: 4) as ‘feedback is information about the gap between the actual level and the reference level of a system parameter which is used to alter the gap in some way’. The review of some definitions of feedback is important as it helps clarify the various components involved in the term ‘feedback’. For the purpose of this research, we define feedback as a process that guides students to close the gap between their current and desired performance. Our research questions focused around this explanation and now we turn to discuss some useful insights on feedback.
Several studies on formative assessment have indicated that learning and feedback are inseparable (Orsmond, Merry, & Reiling, Reference Orsmond, Merry and Reiling2000) and that feedback provided through formative assessments do motivate students and enhance their learning (Yorke, Reference Yorke2003). Positive feedback can have significant impact on student learning (Young, Reference Young2000; Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, Reference Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick2006). Some studies show increased levels of motivation through feedback, as it helps them in two ways: reinforcing and recognising their efforts in the process of their learning (Hyland, Reference Hyland2000; Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, Reference Marzano, Pickering and Pollock2001). While positive feedback is noted for its enhancing effect, negative feedback on the contrary does diminish students’ engagement and motivation (Alton-Lee, Reference Alton-Lee2003). It is also advocated by some authors (e.g., Orsmond, Merry, & Reiling, Reference Orsmond, Merry and Reling2002) that providing positive and negative feedback should lead students to a deeper understanding of the topic/subject.
The timing of providing feedback has gathered good discussion in the literature on enhancing student learning (Tshibalo, Reference Tshibalo2005; Trotter, Reference Trotter2006; Hattie & Timperley, Reference Hattie and Timperley2007). The main aim of feedback is to increase students’ understanding of their knowledge or skill in a specific or general area of content that is part of the learning objectives and outcomes. One important consideration is when to give students their feedback and what is a good timeframe for it. One view strongly advocates that feedback is only useful to students if it is given in a timely fashion (Weaver, Reference Weaver2006). This is to avoid students making further incorrect assumptions, confusions or errors as feedback is conceptualised as reinforcement (Paige, Reference Paige1966; Sullivan, Schutz, & Baker, Reference Sullivan, Schutz and Baker1971; Gibbs, Reference Gibbs2002). By contrast, there are studies that claim that delayed feedback is more useful than immediate feedback for learning and retention of knowledge and skills for students (Butler, Karpicke, & Roediger, Reference Butler, Karpicke and Roediger2007). Other studies (e.g., Butler & Henry, Reference Butler and Henry2008) suggest that the optimal timing of giving feedback, both immediate and delayed, has positive learning impacts for students. The importance of giving timely feedback is still a cause for concern in higher education, as in some instances students only get their feedback after completion of their courses (Gibbs, Reference Gibbs2006). To overcome this issue, formative assessment needs to be planned in such a manner where students can get their feedback and use it for improving their learning before their final examination or at the end of the course (Trotter, Reference Trotter2006). The use of technology can aid in the provision of timely feedback (Ribchester, France, & Wakefield, Reference Ribchester, France and Wakefield2008).
A recent survey in Australia showed that feedback is one of the least satisfactory experiences among students. According to William (Reference William2007), feedback must enable students to act on current or future learning outcomes (William & Black, Reference William and Black1996). He further argues that it is important for markers to ensure that feedback is acted upon by students in order to close the feedback loop (Sadler, Reference Sadler1989). Failure to close the loop by either students or the marker may result in feedback being considered as void. Although feedback places much demand on both teachers and students, it is a worthy effort in promoting learning in higher education (Hattie & Timperley, Reference Hattie and Timperley2007).
Just as feedback is crucial for learning, the quality aspect is equally important. Comprehensibility, poor handwriting (Race, Reference Race2001), inadequate information (Carless, Reference Carless2006), judgemental comments (James, McInnis, & Devlin, Reference James, McInnis and Devlin2002) and grading without any written comments (Swann & Arthur, Reference Swann and Arthur1998) are a few examples that affect the quality of feedback to students. The aim of feedback is to facilitate learning in a manner that students are able to understand their current ability of doing a particular assessment, and to further improve and bridge the gap between their actual knowledge and required performance. The above discussion suggests that feedback is being viewed as an important feature for learning and improvement by students. Thus, the quality aspect must be taken seriously in the process of providing effective feedback.
It is clear that if universities are to improve the quality of teaching and learning, special attention must be paid to feedback. Although there are differences of opinion about some aspects – timing being the main area of disagreement – there is a broad consensus about the importance and the value of effective feedback. However, achieving ‘effective feedback’ is not a simple matter. There are issues on the teaching side that have to be addressed. For one thing, feedback is time-consuming, and time is not something that contemporary universities lavish upon their teachers. However, we also need to examine students’ perspectives. What do students regard as effective and useful? Although all teachers have themselves been students, we teachers cannot presume that we truly understand what our students want or do not want from feedback. Research is necessary, and this paper describes an exploratory project that attempts to gauge students’ perceptions of the different aspects to feedback.
Based on this literature review, we have developed the conceptual model outlined in Figure 1. This diagram has been constructed using systems thinking and causal loop diagramming conventions outlined, for example, in Maani and Cavana (Reference Maani and Cavana2007) or Sterman (Reference Sterman2000). The links between the variables or concepts represent causal relationships in positive (+) or negative (−) directions. The balancing loop (B) represents a regulating feedback loop, whereby the gap between students’ actual and desired performances is corrected over time, following the influences of effective feedback leading to deeper understanding and enhanced student learning.
Conceptual model related to feedback to students from formative assessments
Method
An exploratory survey questionnaire was used in this research as the primary tool for collecting data. In an educational setting, the use of a questionnaire is a useful approach in terms of factors such as time and efficiency. The anonymity of a questionnaire allows students to respond with ease and comfort without the perceived fear of being penalised in their assessments. In order to identify some attributes experienced by students on receiving feedback on their assessment, a small-scale pilot study (85 students) was conducted with a third-year management course at an NZ university. Using the literature on student feedback outlined in the previous section and also from the analysis of the pilot study, a questionnaire was developed.
The questionnaire consisted of three parts and served to fulfil the quantitative, qualitative and demographic profiles for analysis. The first part had 20 questions that related to the various aspects of feedback to students identified in Figure 1, including one key question on the overall satisfaction of feedback given on management courses. A 5-point itemised Likert rating of strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree were used for data collection (1 = ‘strongly disagree’; 5 = ‘strongly agree’).
The second part had two questions that required students to suggest specific things where feedback had helped in their learning and also to list two to three types of their preferences for feedback. The final part of the questionnaire gathered demographic information such as age, nationality/ethnicity and gender.
One faculty administrator and one academic, who were not involved in teaching, administered the questionnaires with 828 students on undergraduate management courses in the commerce faculty at an NZ university. To avoid the presence of academics and tutors who had been involved in the programme, the survey was conducted during the last lesson of the trimester. Prior permission was sought from lecturers involved in the programme to leave their classroom before the survey was conducted. All participants of this research were third-year undergraduates and were selected for three reasons: accessibility, large sample and their rich experiences of receiving feedback for their assessments. Although 828 questionnaires were administered, only 613 were returned, a response rate of 74%.
Demographic details of the respondents to the research are summarised in Table 1.
Demographic information regarding the respondents
Note. aIncludes some double selections
Quantitative data analysis
The data was analysed using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, v16). The quantitative analysis consisted of three parts:
• Descriptive statistics of the survey items.
• Exploratory factor analysis to identify any major factors.
• Correlation analysis to test the relationships between the main factors and students’ overall satisfaction with feedback.
Descriptive statistics
A summary of the descriptive statistics is provided in Table 2. This includes, for each question, the percentage of responses for each category from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5), the number of valid responses for each item (N), the mean score of the responses (from 1 to 5) and the standard deviation (SD) for each item. The items are presented in Table 2 from the highest to lowest mean response. The items receiving the highest mean responses were item 13 ‘I always read the feedback on my assignments’ (mean = 4.5); item 9 ‘Feedback is important to me’ and item 14 ‘It is more important for me to see the reason why I received a particular grade’ (mean = 4.4); item 12 ‘I deserve feedback when I put so much effort in’ and item 19 ‘I always collect my assignments’ (mean = 4.3); and item 2 ‘Feedback tells me what I need to do to improve my performance’ (mean = 4.2). The mean response to the lowest items were very close to neutral (3.0), including the key question item 20 ‘Overall, I was satisfied with feedback given in my management courses’ (3.4)! Note, items 1, 15, 16 and 17 have been reverse coded to provide values comparable with the other items. However, three of these items (i.e., 15, 16 and 17) did provide the three lowest mean responses, around the neutral mark.
Summary of the descriptive statistics for each survey item
Note. aItem reverse coded
Exploratory factor analysis
An exploratory factor analysis of the responses to the 19 independent items in the questionnaire resulted in four independent factors. These factors were called improvement of work quality (Factor 1), improvement of results (Factor 2), need for feedback (Factor 3) and quality of feedback (Factor 4). The rotated factor loadings are listed in Table 3.
Exploratory factor analysis–rotated factor matrixFootnote a
Note. Extraction method = principal axis factoring; rotation method = varimax with Kaiser normalization.
Bold figures indicate factor loadings of >0.3. Factor loadings of ‘0.3 are significant for sample sizes of 350 or greater’ (Hair et al., Reference Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson and Tatham2006: 128).
a Rotation converged in six iterations.
b Recoded (reverse) negatively worded scale items.
The internal consistency or construct reliability of the four factors was tested using Cronbach's α. The results for Factor 1 (six items) was α = 0.786, Factor 2 (five items) was α = 0.750, Factor 3 (four items) was α = 0.666 and Factor 4 (four items) was α = 0.482. The reliability values for Factors 1–3 were above the commonly used threshold of α > 0.60 for exploratory research (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson & Tatham, Reference Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson and Tatham2006: 137). However, the reliability of Factor 4 is below the acceptable level, but has been retained for this exploratory research.
Correlation analysis
The correlation between each factor and item 20, the students’ overall satisfaction with the feedback given in their management courses, was tested. The results, summarised in Table 4, show significant positive correlations between overall satisfaction with feedback (item 20) and three factors (1, 2 and 4) – improvement of work quality, improvement of results and quality of feedback. However, there does not appear to be any statistical relationship between ‘satisfaction with feedback’ and the importance students attach to the feedback (Factor 3, need for feedback). This is an interesting result, although on further reflection it is quite plausible.
Pearson's correlation coefficients
Note. *Correlation is significant at 0.01 level (one-tailed).
Improvement of work quality appears to have the strongest correlation with overall ‘satisfaction with feedback’, followed by improvement of results and then by quality of feedback.
Factors 1 (improvement of work quality) and 2 (improvement of results) are significantly correlated with one another, suggesting some multi-collinearity may be present.
Qualitative data analysis
In this section, we provide a qualitative analysis based on the two open questions in the questionnaire that required students to write specific things that feedback has helped their learning and their preferences for the types of feedback. The data were analysed using a content analysis approach (Cavana, Delahaye, & Sekaran, Reference Cavana, Delahaye and Sekaran2001: 171–176). The four themes presented below were developed from the quantitative analysis: improvement of work quality, improvement of results, need for feedback and quality of feedback. An analysis of the comments by theme is provided in Figure 2. This figure indicates that the largest proportion of the comments (30%) were classified as related to improvement of results, 23% related to improvement of work quality, 21% related to need for feedback, 19% related to quality of feedback and a further 7% were miscellaneous comments.
Summary of comments by theme
These four themes are further analysed below.
Improvement of work quality
The quantitative results showed a clear indication that the students have experienced some improvement in their performance in their formative assessments (see items 2, 5 and 8 in Table 2). The results in Table 4 also show that there is a highly significant positive correlation between improvement of work quality and students’ overall ‘satisfaction with feedback’. This clearly signals the importance of feedback and reinforces the notion that knowledge and learning can be enhanced under the guidance of capable adults, in this instance, the lecturers and tutors who provide the feedback (Vygotsky, Reference Vygotsky1978). Also for feedback to be effective, it has to be relevant and offer suggestions for improvement (Brown, Bull, & Pendlebury, Reference Brown, Bull and Pendlebury1997). It is also clear from the qualitative results that feedback has helped students to improve their learning and has led to improved performance and achievement. Some examples from the survey:
Improved the quality of my assignment.
Helped me to avoid the same problem again in the next assignment.
Helped me to know what is expected of me, how to improve my learning and why I got that grade and helped me see where my weaknesses are.
It must be noted that there is great emphasis on the importance of feedback for students’ improvements at all levels by the university. It is also reflected in the assessment guide that reads as, ‘marked work should be returned to students with constructive feedback in time to be of use for future assessment items’ (VUW, 2009: 3). Giving students an opportunity to act on the feedback is considered as a good practice. Some studies (e.g., Duncan, Reference Duncan2007) claim that students do not read or pay attention to feedback comments, and one possible reason is that students and even teachers view feedback as a separate component from teaching. There is also another view that explains that feedback is just another task of the teacher, thus, owned by the teacher and leads students to undermine the positive effects that students could experience in enhancing their learning (Taras, Reference Taras2003). Despite such claims, our research shows that most students have integrated feedback into subsequent tasks, which is reflected in the above and other comments from the survey.
Improvement of results
The survey results demonstrated that the improvement of results is highly positively correlated to students’ overall ‘satisfaction with feedback’ (see Table 4). Several studies, for example, Gibbs (Reference Gibbs1999), have shown that students improve their grades and final results in a significant way that is attributable to feedback provided in their formative assessments. This is also supported by the results of item 11 in Table 2 above. From both students’ and teachers’ perspectives, the purpose of feedback is to improve learning and results. In this case, it is evident from the comments in the qualitative data as highlighted through the following quotes:
Feedback helps in getting better grades and preparing confidently for future assignments and exams.
Yes it has helped me in my assignments. I have improved and I got good grade in my 2nd assignment.
Improving my grade clarifies which area I need to improve and strengthens my weak areas.
Feedback helped me critically discuss theories that I used in my assignments and obtain better grades in other assignments.
The positive comments show that as an outcome of feedback, students’ learning and results improved. This is, perhaps, not surprising as assessment and feedback are integral aspects of students’ learning experiences and it suggests that if students act upon feedback, they will benefit in understanding and identifying gaps in their knowledge. The above and other comments also indicate that feedback helps to not only clarify what is expected out of the course, but also to enhance positive beliefs and self-esteem. It shows that students value the feedback (Weaver, Reference Weaver2006) and are capable of self-regulating their learning (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, Reference Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick2006). Feedback helps them to engage with the subject in a ‘deep way’ (Higgins, Hartley, & Skelton, Reference Higgins, Hartley and Skelton2002).
Need for feedback
As discussed earlier in the paper, assessment and feedback are important aspects of student learning experiences (Orsmond, Merry, & Reiling, Reference Orsmond, Merry and Reiling2000). Its value has been generally accepted as it is a means whereby student and teacher are linked in the process of understanding and reducing the gap between the current performance and desired goal (Hattie & Timperley, Reference Hattie and Timperley2007). A review of literature does assert that feedback has significant impact on improving student performance.
However, there are two reasons that could contribute to an understanding of the lack of ‘need for feedback’ by students. First, some students may focus only on grades/marks for their formative assessments. Second, students may not have considered feedback as a valuable indicator that signals the deviation from the actual and expected standard of performance. Assessment and feedback are crucial aspects that enhance student-learning experiences. This being the case, it would seem necessary to ensure that students use the feedback to improve their learning (Orsmond, Merry, & Reiling, Reference Orsmond, Merry and Reiling2000). Although the literature provides a definitive picture of the significant impact feedback has on students’ performance, it is still unknown why students do not take the opportunities to act upon feedback to improve their learning and performance for future tasks. Nevertheless, some comments from the qualitative data do show that students perceive feedback as a form of guidance to do well and receive better grades in their future assignments:
Helped to know what went wrong and why this mark was given
Determine my overall strengths and weaknesses.
Areas to improve on
Helped to refine future course assignments.
The above comments do imply that students who act upon feedback have benefited in getting better results and helps in the ongoing process and progress of student learning. It is important for students to understand how feedback can support their learning and also how it can help them to develop a ‘deep learning’ approach that is a skill required for lifelong learning (Higgins, Hartley, & Skelton, Reference Higgins, Hartley and Skelton2002).
Quality of feedback
An important and fundamental role of higher education teachers is providing quality feedback for students to enable them to learn from their assessments. As discussed earlier in this paper, feedback does impact on students’ performance and motivation (Irons, Reference Irons2008). Some studies (Swann & Arthur, Reference Swann and Arthur1998; Race, Reference Race2001) have clearly shown that the quality of feedback is one of the factors that determine whether the student benefits from the feedback provided on assessments. Our research (Table 4) shows that there is small but significant correlation between quality of feedback and overall ‘satisfaction with feedback’ and the quantitative results are supported by comments such as:
Helped to see where I went wrong.
Gave suggestions to what needs to be done to improve my grades and learning.
Helped me to re-read questions and put my thoughts in the right direction.
Improve areas where I wasn't good. I understand the course better now.
The above comments show that the quality of feedback has helped students to think about their learning and task performance, and have engaged them to understand the task criteria and specified assessment goals. By contrast there are students who have expressed the view that the quality of feedback was of poor quality or could be further improved. Some comments by these students are:
The feedback given was very poor and inappropriate
Feedback was scarce, rushed, unhelpful and very general
Feedback was useful but no opportunity to discuss further on it.
I did not receive enough feedback. Some comments are very general.
Some indications from the above comments are that feedback needs to be specific, in-depth and constructive and needs further clarification. However desirable this may be, it is uncertain whether it will be achieved in a climate of increased demands on staff (e.g., particularly for research) at universities and other institutions of higher learning. Quality feedback, after all, does require considerable time, thought and effort!
Conclusions
This paper has examined various aspects of feedback provided to students on their formative assessments, and the satisfaction from this feedback, as expressed by a large sample of undergraduate management students at an NZ university. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were undertaken of the data collected from a short questionnaire administered in the last class of the trimester. Over 600 valid questionnaires were completed, providing considerable quantitative data related to 20 aspects of feedback provided to students. Qualitative analysis was based on the two open questions in the questionnaire that required students to write specific things that feedback has helped their learning and their preferences for the types of feedback.
The quantitative analysis involved the presentation of descriptive statistics of the responses for each item in the questionnaire, an exploratory factor analysis and correlation analysis of the emergent factors with the satisfaction students derived from feedback on their management courses. The emergent factors were improvement of work quality, improvement of results, need for feedback and quality of feedback. The qualitative analysis involved classifying the comments according to these themes, followed by a further content analysis of comments within the themes.
The results indicate that improvement of performance (both work quality and results) and the quality of feedback, lead to higher levels of overall student satisfaction with feedback provided on management courses (by tutors and lecturers).
The major limitation of this research is that it is exploratory and only based on a sample drawn from management courses at a single NZ university. Nevertheless, considerable scope exists for further research in this field, including:
• Further developing the conceptual diagram outlined in this paper.
• Developing further operational definitions for the concepts and variables identified in the conceptual model and questionnaire related to this research.
• Further developing the data collection instrument outlined in this research, including additional testing of it for validity and reliability.
• Undertaking more theoretical and empirical research to find out why students do not always take the opportunities to act upon feedback to improve their learning and performance for future tasks.
Finally, it must be re-stated that this subject is undeniably important, and timely, but further analysis and research needs to be undertaken. The implications of the results outlined in this paper emphasise the importance of high quality feedback to students providing opportunities for improving the quality of their work and the improvement of their results. This will lead to greater student learning and satisfaction with the feedback they receive on their tertiary education courses.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank V.P. Usha for her assistance with the interviews and transcriptions, and the two reviewers for their invaluable feedback. However, the interpretations and opinions in this paper are those of the authors.
