From fixing the work to improving the learner: An initial evaluation of a professional learning intervention using a new student-centred feedback model

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100943Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Introduced and evaluated a new student-centred feedback model.

  • Evidence of model effectiveness was obtained in a professional learning intervention.

  • Participant beliefs and practices shifted from transmissive to student-centred.

  • Co-constructing success with students was foundational to student self-regulation.

  • Context-specific guidance and collaboration were pivotal to intervention success.

Abstract

Despite the longstanding recognition of the power of feedback to enhance student learning outcomes, its potential is often not realised in classroom practice. Recent research highlights the need for a student-centred perspective to enable effective feedback practices that foster student self-regulation. Based on an identified gap in the literature, a new empirically-informed student-centred feedback model (SCFM) was designed. This study, contextualised in English writing, investigated to what extent a professional learning intervention using the SCFM was perceived as effective in promoting student-centred classroom feedback practices. Focus group interview data from 49 teachers and 30 school leaders across 13 Australian primary schools were thematically analysed. Results suggest the intervention caused shifts in thinking, feedback practices, and student self-regulation, which participants perceived had enhanced student learning outcomes. This study provides initial empirical evidence regarding (1) the effectiveness of the SCFM, and (2) the professional learning intervention characteristics required to realise effective feedback practices.

Introduction

Numerous studies have highlighted the importance of feedback in students’ learning (e.g., Black & Wiliam, 2009; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Sadler, 2010). Feedback is a powerful influence on students’ achievement (Hattie, 2009, ES = 0.73, p. 173), as it can help students to reduce the gap between their current understandings and learning goals (Ramaprasad, 1983; Sadler, 1989). In the last two decades, feedback practices have been developed in schools through the concepts of formative assessment, and more recently, Assessment for Learning (AfL) (Assessment Reform Group, 2002; Jonsson, Lundahl, & Holmgren, 2015; William & Thompson, 2008).

Formative assessment has come to be interpreted in many different ways, with differing emphases on the use of assessment evidence to inform teaching and learning, and teacher and student roles within these processes (Bennett, 2011; Heitink, Van der Kleij, Veldkamp, Schildkamp, & Kippers, 2016). AfL as an approach to formative assessment aims to continuously draw on formal and informal evidence to guide decisions by teachers and students on the next steps in teaching and learning (Assessment Reform Group, 2002; Heitink et al., 2016; William & Thompson, 2008). Five key strategies underpin AfL (William & Thompson, 2008): (1) clarifying success; (2) eliciting assessment evidence of student progress; (3) providing feedback; (4) peer-assessment and feedback; and (5) promoting student self-assessment and self-regulation. Although feedback is described as one of the five key AfL strategies, in this study, we perceive feedback to be central to improving student learning using all AfL strategies.

A major concern, however, is the remarkable variability of the effects of feedback, despite the overall large positive effects (Hattie, 2009; Kluger & Denisi, 1996). Past research has focused on identifying variables that enhance or impede feedback effectiveness. For example, the content and focus of the feedback message (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Shute, 2008), the conditions under which it is provided (e.g., timing, classroom climate; Gamlem & Smith, 2013; Heitink et al., 2016; Shute, 2008), and individual student variables such as interpretation, perception and willingness to act on it (Heitink et al., 2016; Sadler, 2010; Winstone, Nash, Parker, & Rowntree, 2017), all play a role in determining its effectiveness for student learning. However, decades of empirical research have highlighted that the effects of feedback on student learning are inconsistent, and importantly, not always positive (Hattie, 2009; Kluger & Denisi, 1996).

Much of the feedback literature has focused on how feedback may effectively be provided by teachers, with limited consideration of how effective student engagement with feedback may be facilitated (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Van der Kleij, Adie, & Cumming, 2019; Winstone et al., 2017). Student self-regulation has been identified as a major influence on the extent to which students monitor their progress in relation to learning goals, and seek, welcome and use feedback to enhance their learning outcomes (Birenbaum, Kimron, & Shilton, 2011; Black & Wiliam, 2009; Clark, 2012; Harris & Brown, 2013; Hattie & Timperley, 2007). This highlights the need to explore ways to promote effective and sustainable feedback practices that support student self-regulation.

To harness the power of feedback, recent research has focused on professional learning (PL) for teachers in AfL to further enhance their capacity in facilitating effective classroom feedback practices (e.g., Andersson & Palm, 2017; Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall, & William, 2003; James & McCormick, 2009; Jonsson et al., 2015). As described by Timperley (2011), PL is: “an internal process in which individuals create professional knowledge through interaction with [certain types of] information in a way that challenges previous assumptions and creates new meanings” (p. 5). The term PL is preferred over professional development here, to emphasise teacher agency for professional growth (Labone & Long, 2016).

Studies on PL in feedback within AfL have yielded mixed results in fidelity of implementation (e.g., Black et al., 2003; James & McCormick, 2009; Jonsson et al., 2015). Realising the ‘spirit’of AfL depends on teachers’ willingness and capacity to make students active, resulting in student autonomy and ownership (DeLuca, Chapman-Chin, & Klinger, 2019; James & McCormick, 2009). However, research suggests that although teachers may acquire knowledge of effective feedback and may be successful in implementing certain feedback strategies, feedback often remains a teacher-framed practice, with limited implementation of strategies that require an active student role such as peer and self-assessment (e.g., Black et al., 2003; James & McCormick, 2009; Jonsson et al., 2015). In some cases, this has resulted in unintended negative side-effects. For example, evaluation of a large-scale PL initiative in Sweden (Jonsson et al., 2015) showed that unintendedly, many teachers experienced an increased workload following the PL intervention, as they took sole responsibility for assessment and provision of feedback. As such, the intervention failed to make students active in the feedback process, resulting in unsustainable feedback practices.

We contend, that to realise effective and sustainable feedback practices that foster student self-regulation, PL interventions must address feedback from a student-centred perspective. For this reason, a new empirically-informed model of effective feedback with a student-centred approach was designed by the authors. The present study reports on the use and an initial evaluation of the new student-centred feedback model (SCFM) by the present authors in a PL intervention with primary school teachers, school leaders and students. This study aimed to answer the following research question: to what extent is a PL intervention, using a new SCFM perceived as effective in promoting classroom feedback practices that support student self-regulation? The next section provides a brief synthesis of relevant literature regarding key characteristics of PL interventions in feedback. The subsequent section presents the new SCFM that was used and evaluated in this study.

Section snippets

The new student-centred feedback model

Fig. 1 presents the SCFM used in the PL intervention. The new SCFM draws on the widely-used Hattie and Timperley (2007) model, which proposed that feedback is guided by three questions: ‘Where am I going?’ (what are the learning goals?; feed up), ‘How am I going?’ (how does my progress compare to the goals?; feed back), and ‘Where to next?’ (what are the next steps I need to take to achieve the goals?; feed forward). The design of the SCFM was founded upon the idea of visible learning (Hattie,

Context

The SCFM proposed in this paper underpins a larger research project (funding body and project title blinded for review). The overall project aimed to investigate the effects of a PL intervention in effective feedback on Australian primary teachers’ practices and student outcomes. This paper focuses on how the proposed SCFM—which was at the core of the PL intervention—was perceived and implemented by teachers and school leaders.

The study was conducted in Queensland, where feedback and AfL have

Results

The following sections outline the synthesis of results from the teacher and school leader focus groups, as aligned with the seven themes. As can be expected based on the nature of the SCFM, there was substantial overlap between the individual elements. The synthesis of results is supported by relevant quotes, to provide insights into the perceived effectiveness of the intervention using the SCFM as experienced by participants. Findings were mostly consistent across teacher and school leader

Discussion

This study, situated in Australian primary schools, investigated to what extent a PL intervention using a new SCFM was perceived as effective in promoting classroom feedback practices that support student self-regulation. Overall, evidence from teacher and school leader focus groups showed that participants perceived that the intervention had caused shifts in thinking, feedback practices, and student self-regulation, which they perceived had enhanced student learning outcomes. The findings

Funding

This research was supported by the Australian Government through the Australian Research Council [LP160101604].

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, [RB]. The data are not publicly available due to their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Cameron Brooks: Conceptualization, Methodology, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Supervision, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Rochelle Burton: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Project administration, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Fabienne van der Kleij: Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Annemaree Carroll:

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors report no declarations of interest.

References (65)

  • R. Bennett

    Formative assessment: A critical review

    Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice

    (2011)
  • J. Biggs

    Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment

    Higher Education

    (1996)
  • P. Black et al.

    Developing the theory of formative assessment

    Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability

    (2009)
  • P. Black et al.

    Assessment for Learning: Putting it into practice

    (2003)
  • D. Boud et al.

    Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design

    Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education

    (2013)
  • L. Bourgeois

    Supporting students’ learning: From teacher regulation to co-regulation

  • C. Brooks et al.

    What is my next step? School students’ perceptions of feedback

    Frontiers in Education

    (2019)
  • G.T.L. Brown et al.

    Methods in feedback research

  • D.L. Butler et al.

    Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis

    Review of Educational Research

    (1995)
  • D. Carless et al.

    Managing dialogic use of exemplars

    Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education

    (2017)
  • J. Chappuis

    Helping students understand assessment

    Educational Leadership

    (2005)
  • I. Clark

    Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning

    Educational Psychology Review

    (2012)
  • G. Claxton

    What kind of learning does self‐assessment drive? Developing a “nose” for quality: Comments on Klenowski (1995)

    Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice

    (1995)
  • J. Creswell et al.

    Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches

    (2018)
  • C. DeLuca et al.

    Assessment in early primary education: An empirical study of five school contexts

    Journal of Research in Childhood Education

    (2014)
  • C. DeLuca et al.

    Toward a teacher professional learning continuum in Assessment for Learning

    Educational Assessment

    (2019)
  • L. Desimone

    Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures

    Educational Researcher

    (2009)
  • J. Donohoo et al.

    The power of collective efficacy

    Educational Leadership

    (2018)
  • C.S. Dweck

    Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development

    (2000)
  • C.A. Engelmann et al.

    Improving student learning by addressing misconceptions

    Eos Transactions American Geophysical Union

    (2011)
  • S.M. Gamlem et al.

    Student perceptions of classroom feedback

    Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice

    (2013)
  • T.R. Guskey

    Professional development and teacher change

    Teachers and Teaching Theory and Practice

    (2002)
  • Cited by (16)

    • Implementation of Assessment for Learning

      2022, International Encyclopedia of Education: Fourth Edition
    • Teachers activating learners: The effects of a student-centred feedback approach on writing achievement

      2021, Teaching and Teacher Education
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, there is much variability in feedback effectiveness and, in some cases, feedback can inhibit learning (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Wisniewski et al., 2020). Education research points to the importance of three interrelated pertinent features to realising the power of feedback: (1) the critical role of students in feedback needs to be recognised, as feedback cannot be effective unless students actively engage with it (Hattie et al., 2016, Lipnevich et al., 2016, Van der Kleij et al., 2019); (2) feedback needs to be embedded as a key feature of formative classroom practice (Assessment Reform Group [ARG], 2002; Wiliam, 2011; Wiliam & Thompson, 2008); and (3) teachers require substantial professional learning support to implement student-centred feedback practices (Black et al., 2003; Brooks et al., 2021; DeLuca et al., 2019). The subsequent sections discuss key literature in relation to these three pertinent features.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text