Research has shown that giving quality feedback to students, which is an aspect of formative assessment, is a high-yield strategy that educators can use to advance academic achievement and support students in their learning process. The study took place in a Virginia school division where formative assessment was not a division-wide initiative used to increase student achievement. Therefore, the purpose of this qualitative case study was to identify the perceptions of teachers and students concerning formative feedback and distinguish the types of written feedback that may influence student learning. Bandura's social cognitive theory of self-efficacy and motivation provided the conceptual framework for this study. Teachers' and students' perspectives and student work samples were analyzed to determine the types of feedback that influenced students' learning in mathematics and to gain an understanding of teachers' and students' perceptions of written formative feedback. Data were collected through interviews with 10 elementary teachers and 20 elementary third through fifth grade students at 2 elementary schools and by collecting 318 work samples of these students. Themes emerged from inductive coding, and teachers' feedback was categorized using a feedback typology to determine the types of feedback teachers gave students. The teachers' and students' understanding of written formative feedback varied but both groups found written descriptive feedback aligned with learning outcomes were most beneficial. The results could serve to improve professional development for teachers on formative feedback, which could increase student learning.

This report describes a systematic procedure designed to give students pronunciation feedback on suprasegmental features of English in spontaneous production (rather than students' pronunciation during a read-aloud task). The procedure was developed to find out if written feedback (given frequently enough) could impact students' spontaneous production of suprasegmentals. Pronunciation feedback was given to the treatment group by marking transcripts of spontaneous speech with written symbols. Both the treatment group and the control group received form-focused pronunciation instruction. After 14 weeks, there was no significant difference between the groups, but there was a statistically significant improvement in students' comprehensibility overall (regardless of the feedback condition). Students were also surveyed to determine if either group perceived a greater benefit from the pronunciation instruction or if either group perceived a greater improvement in pronunciation. Surveys revealed a meaningful correlation between the group that received the treatment and the group that found the pronunciation instruction to be beneficial.

Magister Curationis - MCur / Background: Written feedback from lecturers to their students, in higher education institutions, plays an important role in improving students’ performance. However, students’ perceptions of written feedback on assessments could influence its utilization to improve their performance. Despite the high priority placed on written feedback, to date, insufficient research studies have been conducted on the student nurses’ perceptions of written feedback. Purpose and Objective: The purpose of this descriptive study is to describe student nurses’ perceptions of written feedback on assessments at a university in the Western Cape. The objective of this study is to determine student nurses’ perceptions of written feedback on assessment. Methodology: A quantitative descriptive survey research design was employed to conduct this study at a university in the Western Cape. The target population for this study was 106 student nurses registered in the nursing foundation programme for the year 2015. This study employed all-inclusive sampling of foundation student nurses registered in the year 2015. A questionnaire was used to collect data from the participants. A total of 74 participants were available for the study, of whom, 69 submitted their questionnaires, resulting to a response rate of 93.2%. The data was analyzed by using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23 and was presented in frequency tables, percentages and bar graphs. Ethics approval was obtained from the Senate Higher Degree and the Senate Research Committees of the institution under study, before commencing. Permission was also obtained from the Dean of Research and Head of the School of Nursing, before the commencement of the study. The purpose of the study was explained, and a consent form was signed, before the questionnaires were administered to participants. Findings: The findings of this study indicated that students receive feedback on assessment, were in line with the assessment criteria. The study also found that students perceived receiving plenty of quality written feedback in good time to be useful. The results of this study indicated that the inability to understand written feedback, the limited opportunity to clarify feedback and negatively written comments, hinders the use of written feedback. Recommendations: There is the need for lecturers to provide written feedback that could be useful for students to improve on their performance. There is also the need for written feedback to be delivered to students electronically. Lecturers need to discuss written feedback with their students after delivery. The need for a qualitative study to be conducted on student’s and lecturers experiences on written feedback on assessment is recommended.

This report seeks to examine the literature related to written corrective feedback in second/foreign language classrooms in order to inform the most effective pedagogical practices related to this topic. I begin with an article by Truscott which would set the tone for the academic debate on whether or not to provide written corrective feedback in L2 classrooms. In his 1996 article Truscott claims that written corrective feedback a) is not helpful, b) is harmful, and c) should be eliminated entirely. Chapter 1 covers this debate, referred to as the Truscott Debate, reviewing the many articles that directly answer the challenge laid down by Truscott (1996). Following a review of this academic debate, I examine the literature that investigates the specific providers of feedback (teachers or peer feedback), the types of feedback (direct or indirect) and the degree of focus related to those feedback options. Chapter 4 reviews other factors that can also affect the efficacy of written corrective feedback, such as student motivation, learner levels, and oral feedback in conjunction with written feedback and online feedback. Chapter 5 puts forth particular circumstances in which each type of feedback can be efficacious, offering a guide for the provision of feedback in a variety of circumstances. / text

<p>This paper is a study of written feedback in English teaching in an upper secondary school. The research is a comparative study of the teachers’ and the students’ experiences working with written feedback. The intention of the research is to study the teachers’ usage of feedback on written work in their English teaching and how the students and the teachers experience the feedback in relation to the students’ development in the English language.</p><p>The study is based on national and international research regarding the usage of feedback in teaching. The method for the study is qualitative and involves interviews of four teachers and four students.</p><p>The results of the study reveal that written feedback is individually adapted and used when assignments are finished. Students who are interested and motivated to learn English are provided with more feedback. Written feedback is combined with oral feedback to make sure the feedback is understood. The written feedback is often provided combined with a grade. Students are of the opinion that feedback develops their skills in English while teachers claim that they do not detect the connection between written feedback and student improvement.</p><p>In conclusion students do not get the opportunity to improve their skills due to the absence of process writing which means that students are responsible for whether or not the feedback is acted on. Students who are good in English improve their English more since the teachers provide them with more feedback than the weaker students. The combination of feedback and grades results in the students not paying attention to the feedback.</p>

This paper is a study of written feedback in English teaching in an upper secondary school. The research is a comparative study of the teachers’ and the students’ experiences working with written feedback. The intention of the research is to study the teachers’ usage of feedback on written work in their English teaching and how the students and the teachers experience the feedback in relation to the students’ development in the English language. The study is based on national and international research regarding the usage of feedback in teaching. The method for the study is qualitative and involves interviews of four teachers and four students. The results of the study reveal that written feedback is individually adapted and used when assignments are finished. Students who are interested and motivated to learn English are provided with more feedback. Written feedback is combined with oral feedback to make sure the feedback is understood. The written feedback is often provided combined with a grade. Students are of the opinion that feedback develops their skills in English while teachers claim that they do not detect the connection between written feedback and student improvement. In conclusion students do not get the opportunity to improve their skills due to the absence of process writing which means that students are responsible for whether or not the feedback is acted on. Students who are good in English improve their English more since the teachers provide them with more feedback than the weaker students. The combination of feedback and grades results in the students not paying attention to the feedback.

abstract: ABSTRACT Much of teacher feedback research is conducted in the L1 and L2 contexts. There is a paucity of research about feedback in the Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language (TCFL) context. Particularly, little is known about teachers' feedback practices and student views of teacher feedback. The present study was undertaken to fill the research gap by focusing on teachers'written feedback. Student data from surveying 38 students was interpreted with teacher data gained from interviewing three teachers. The findings indicate that teacher written feedback, which occurred in a multiple-draft writing cycle, generally accorded with recommended feedback principles. Students responded favorably to teacher written feedback. The results also reveal discrepancies between teachers' feedback practices and student perceptions of and preferences regarding teacher feedback. The results show that students wanted more written comments from teachers, though most teachers didn't prioritize written comments. Despite teachers' practices and their inclination toward offering coded indirect error correction, students in the study expressed their preferences for direct error correction. Most students are interested in receiving teacher feedback that addresses all aspects of writing rather than primarily focusing on language accuracy. The reasons that may account for the disjuncture are also discussed in the study. The study concludes that it is important for teachers to be aware of student attitudes and expectations regarding teacher feedback. Teachers should be flexible enough to provide individualized feedback. Pedagogical implications are included in the paper in the hope of shedding light on the development of effective and helpful teacher feedback. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.A. Asian Languages and Civilizations 2012

Formativ bedömning eller bedömning för lärande introducerades i en kommun i södra Sverige 2013. Målsättningen har sedan dess varit att få med alla yrkesverksamma pedagoger i kommunen till att arbeta formativt i sina klassrum. Bedömning för lärande består av sex nyckelstrategier där feedback, som för lärandet framåt, är en av dessa. Feedback kan ges på olika sätt men de mest vanliga är skriftlig feedback och muntlig feedback. Få studier har gjorts där man har varit intresserad av elevers upplevelser av det formativa arbetssättet. Syftet med denna studie har varit att komma åt elevernas upplevelser av feedback. Vilken sorts feedback föredrar eleverna? När upplever eleverna feedback som betydelsefull? Och finns det faktorer som påverkar mottagandet av feedback? För att svara på dessa frågor har sex elever i årskurs nio intervjuats. Dessa elever har alla gått i en kommunal skola och under många år fått feedback, både muntligt och i skrift. Det insamlade materialet från intervjuerna har sedan kategoriserats och analyserats med hjälp av den sociokulturella teorin och det formativa förhållningssättet. Både dessa utgår ifrån att, samarbetsinriktade aktiviteter mellan lärare och elever, är viktiga förutsättningar för elevens lärande. Resultatet visar att det, enligt eleverna, finns för- och nackdelar med både muntlig och skriftlig feedback. Det eleverna värdesätter mest är feedbackens utformning, även om relationen med läraren också kan vara av betydelse. Eleverna anser att feedback bör bekräfta prestationen för att därefter föreslå förändringar som behöver göras. Detta för att eleverna ska känna sig motiverade till att fortsätta arbeta med uppgiften och ämnet. / Formative assessment was introduced in a municipality in the south of Sweden year 2013.Since then the aim of the initiative has been to inspire all teachers to apply a formativeassessment in the classrooms. Formative assessment includes five key strategies wherefeedback is one of them. Feedback could be presented in various ways but the mostcommon one is written and spoken feedback received on a task. Not many studies aremade on the students’ experiences of formative assessment. Therefore, the purpose ofthis study is to widen the understanding of the students’ experiences, what kind offeedback they prefer, when they appreciate the feedback as an important scaffolding andif there are contributing factors to their overall experience of feedback. To answer thesequestions, interviews were made with six students in the Swedish secondary school.They have all attended a public school in a municipality during many years and receivedfeedback both written and spoken. The information from the interviews has beencategorized and analyzed through a sociocultural theory. This theory argues thatcooperation between student and teacher is necessary for the development of thestudent. According to the students, there are pros and cons to both written and spokenfeedback. Students mostly value the shape of the feedback, but the relationship betweenstudent and teacher can also matter when feedback is given. The students believe thatfeedback should acknowledge the effort as well as suggest further development for thestudents to feel motivated to continue the work, both with the assignment and thesubject in general.

Formative feedback is an active tool for a productive classroom. However, it may affect students’ written language positively or negatively. We all need confirmation from trusted peers or teachers to learn and develop knowledge and understanding. This project investigates what types of feedback teachers provide to students’ written texts and the reasons behind their choices. To collect the data required, four experienced teachers were interviewed. The study shows that it is valuable to give feedback orally to communicate. In spoken situations, teachers can make sure that the students have understood. The problem with written feedback is that it is often not understood or used by the learners. Regardless of whether the feedback appears in speaking or writing, it needs to communicate an understandable and specific message to the learners. The study shows that all teachers prefer providing oral feedback. However, because of time constraints, they use more written feedback. Furthermore, all teachers prefer not to correct all errors in the text. Instead, they focus on one issue at a time. Otherwise, students lose their interest in writing. Moreover, this study highlights the importance of focusing the feedback on an essay’s content, structure, and coherence rather than on grammar. The rationale given by the teachers concerns the students’ willingness to develop as a writer. Too much focus on grammar and incorrect uses of language may have a negative impact on this willingness. The conclusion of this study is that the four teachers prefer to give feedback several times. Firstly, they give informal and oral formative feedback before the task. Secondly, they provide written formative feedback on the students’ drafts. Thus, before submitting their completed texts for final assessment, they have the opportunity to revise their texts with the support of the teacher’s responses.

<p>The aim of this investigation was to find out how students react to and make use of oral and written feedback given to them in class. Another aim was to find out if they preferred one form over the other and whether they make more use of that form. The investigation was conducted at a Swedish upper secondary school and consisted of a questionnaire survey and interviews with groups of students and with their teachers. The interviews with the students focused on clarifying some of the results from the questionnaire. The teacher interviews gave the teachers a chance to give their version of what they thought worked better and why they chose to work that way.</p><p> </p><p>The results showed that students welcome feedback, especially positive feedback used for encouragement. However, they also thought that there was a higher limit to the amount of feedback they could benefit from. Too much of one sort could be ignored or perceived as discouraging. The feedback mostly used in class was oral feedback. This was also what the students thought they benefited from the most since it invited to discussion about their work. Most of the students thought the feedback should be delivered in private because it could be embarrassing to receive feedback in front of their peers. Nevertheless, feedback on pronunciation and smaller errors that could be of use for their peers as well was acceptable in front of the class.</p>