Below is a very rough draft of a mock-up paper that I wrote as part of my performance management for the last academic year. It is based on the pilot-interviews that I conducted in preparation for my Thesis. I'm sure there are a TON of errors in it, but I thought it might be of interest for some people to read. Please don't take anything that I've written here as information that can be generalised; it can't be. I merely intended for the data collection, analysis and subsequent paper to be a learning process for me. Take from it what you will! Criticism and comments are welcome, as always!
Introduction
Over the
past few years, increasing importance has been placed on teachers being able provide
feedback that ‘moves learners forward’ and which is worded as ‘guidance on what
to do next, rather than telling [them] about what was deficient’ (William,
2009). Clarke (2005) similarly says that ‘feedback needs to be on improvement,
not correction’. Feedback on learning which is ‘geared towards improving
learning rather than measuring it’, which ‘puts emphasis on each pupils
progress’ without comparison to others and which is ‘part of an ongoing
dialogue rather than judgment’ is more likely to make a positive contribution
to learning than a negative one (Swaffield, 2008). Studies have shown that for
any type of feedback to be useful it should include a high level of student
involvement and allow both teachers and students to ‘arrive at a shared vision
of learning objectives’ (CERI, 2005). It should also be ‘timely and specific,
and include suggestions for ways to improve’ while also being ‘tied to explicit
criteria regarding expectations’ (CERI, 2005).
However, few
studies have been conducted to explore how the students themselves perceive
feedback, especially at the secondary school level. Flutter and Rudduck (2004)
state that too much research has focused on ‘looking in from the outside’, and
that we should instead try to investigate pupils’ perceptions and attitudes by
going directly to the source; the students themselves. More recently, Hargreaves
(2013) has echoed this sentiment by stating that we ‘lack many details about
how feedback helps children’s classroom learning’ because we fail to see things
from the learners perspective. Gamlem and Smith (2013) state that there is a
need for further research to ‘study the development of reception and use of
feedback among students and what role the teacher plays in creating knowledge,
skills and climates where feedback is not simply like messages thrown out in
bottles’ but is instead ‘where teachers can be relatively certain that the
feedback message reaches and can be used by the intended recipient’. In their
work from across the UK, Flutter and Rudduck (2004) found that ‘pupils of all
ages can show a remarkable capacity to discuss their learning in a considered
and insightful way’.
It is with Flutter and Ruddock’s (2004)
ideas in mind that I sought to consult secondary school students about their
perception of feedback within the classroom. This paper is the result of a
series of pilot interviews conducted for my Masters of Education thesis. Acting as a researcher, alongside a pair of
student-researchers, I conducted group or individual interviews with a total of
eleven students aged 11 to 15 in a UK secondary school.
Research
design and ethical considerations
The research described in this paper began
in June 2014 and was completed in July 2014. As such, it is a very brief sample
of student responses. The aim of the research was to understand student’s
perception of feedback within English lessons, and how this feedback
contributed to their learning and subsequent progress. I was particularly
interested in seeing how students felt about a new school-wide marking policy
(two star and a wish), which was implemented a year earlier.
Initially, I conducted the study on my own;
however, as I continued to do research for another paper, I decided to try to
include student-researchers for the final interview. I randomly selected three
students from a Year 7, 8, 9 and 10 form to take part in group or individual
interviews. In consultation with form tutors, students with a range of levels
and abilities were chosen so that a wider variety and depth could be given to
the responses, with three attaining higher levels, three attaining middle
levels and two attaining lower levels. I chose to focus on feedback in English
because the results were to be used as part of my yearly performance
management, which needed to be linked to my main teaching subject of English.
Therefore, while no generalisations can be made from the data, the study can
provide interesting insight into how students in one secondary school setting
view feedback, and can act as a starting point for further research into
student perception of feedback in general.
The principal method of data collection was
group or individual interviews. Initially, I interviewed students from Year 8,
9 and 10 in groups of two or three. For the final interview, I had one
student-researcher interview one Year 7 student.
The
British Educational Research Association (BERA) state that anyone who wishes to
include children in the research process must comply with Articles 3 and 12 of
the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of Children; all actions must be
in the best interest of the child and all children who are ‘capable
of forming their own views should be granted the right to express their views
freely in all matters affecting them’ (BERA, 2011). BERA also state that the
permission of those who act as guardians (parents) or ‘responsible others’
(social workers) should be sought (BERA, 2011). As
such, the parents of both the student-researchers and
the interview subjects were sent a letter outlining the aims of and planned
processes of the project, asking parents to opt out if they were not
comfortable with their child taking part. All but three of the students
returned their forms, so they were not included in the study. In total, there
was one boy from Year 7, two girls from Year 8, two boys and one girl from Year
9, and two girls and one boy from Year 10.
The interviews were conducted and video-recorded
during a twenty-minute registration period at the start of the day so that
students did not miss any lessons. All interviews were conducted in an empty
classroom, with the door closed for privacy. The interviews were video recorded
for transcription purposes. This allowed me to record and note facial
expressions and gestures during the interviews, which was especially helpful
for the interview conducted by the student-researcher, which I was not present
for.
All students were given the opportunity to
refuse participation in the research, prior to the interview starting, as well
as having the option of not being recorded. Students were assured that the
video would be deleted upon completion of the project, and viewed only by
myself, for transcription purposes. No students refused to take part in the
interview, nor did they object to being video-recorded. The length of the
interviews varied from approximately nine minutes to just over twelve minutes,
resulting in a total of 20:54 minutes of video-recorded interviews.
A
series of ten open-ended questions were used to ask students about their
experiences with feedback in English. These questions were adapted from those
used by Gamlem and Smith (2013) (see Appendix 1). Open-ended question
were used because they allow the researcher to collect information about
people’s preferences and opinions, and to explore their experiences,
motivations and reasoning in more detail (Drever, 1995).
Data
analysis was informed by the grounded theory. This means that any conclusions I
make here arise from the data itself (Taber, 2013). The interviews were
transcribed, verbatim, by myself within 48 hours of the interview taking place.
A research diary was kept as well, in which I recorded any emergent thoughts or
ideas immediately after each interview took place and prior to transcription.
These helped me to return to my initial thoughts, comparing them to the themes
which emerged later during analysis of the transcripts. Extracts of the
transcripts were checked and validated by the student-researchers to ensure
accuracy throughout the process. I then read through each transcript,
identifying themes as and when I felt they emerged; I did not look for any
pre-existing themes as identified in the literature. Instead, I tried to spot
patterns in the data using my own judgment and professional knowledge (Taber,
2013). Finally, I compared themes between each transcript, identifying common
themes throughout the interviews. These themes will be explored in the sections
which follow.
Student’s comments on teacher
feedback in English
Overall,
the students felt that the ‘two star and a wish’ marking policy was helpful,
although some expressed concerns that they weren’t always being given the time
to use their targets, nor was it always clear what these targets meant. The
common themes that emerged from analysis of the data include the following:
·
The students felt that instructive, or constructive,
feedback was the most helpful
·
Some students were not being given sufficient time to work
with, or even reflect upon, their targets
·
Students value verbal clarification of targets alongside written
feedback
·
Students felt that clear boundaries and expectations are
needed before and after doing an important piece of work
·
Students felt they would benefit from better training, including
how to peer and self assess
Each
of these points will be addressed in some detail in the sections that follow.
The students felt that
instructive, or constructive, feedback was the most helpful
Most
of the students interviewed described the benefits of receiving two stars and a
wish in their English lessons. For example, Joe, a Year 7 student, stated that
that he found two stars and a wish ‘very useful because you can put it into
your next piece of work so you can improve’. Similarly, Debbie, a Year 8 student,
felt that the feedback was helpful because it told her ‘what to improve on’ and
helped her to ‘check that [she] can improve on [the target]’ and to ‘stretch
[herself] further’. The three Year 10 students interviewed also agreed that the
two stars and a wish policy was helpful because it allowed them to ‘play to
[their] strengths but also…you can see what is written and [teachers have]
explained how you can improve as well’.
Overall,
the majority of the students interviewed felt that the two star and wish
marking policy was a positive thing. However, the students did identify a few
areas for improvement. For example, when asked what they appreciated least
about feedback the two Year 8 students replied with the following:
Debbie: probably when like it’s really bad like you know how badly you’ve done something
Alice: yah
Debbie: yah
KC: so like when
it…sometimes when it’s negative…it’s not great
Debbie and Alice: yah
Alice: yah and also like sometimes when they [the teacher] write like the wishes and things…um sometimes they’re quite basic and y-you think like…or they’ve done it the same on another piece of work so like they’ve done that already so you think like could they have found a different wish for that…
KC: okay…yah…that makes sense…
Debbie and Alice: yah
Alice: yah and also like sometimes when they [the teacher] write like the wishes and things…um sometimes they’re quite basic and y-you think like…or they’ve done it the same on another piece of work so like they’ve done that already so you think like could they have found a different wish for that…
KC: okay…yah…that makes sense…
Debbie: yah or like when
everybody has like the same target…
This extract suggests that students find
targets less helpful when they are overly negative or basic, or when they don’t
suggest that the teacher has taken the time to give a personalised target. Ben,
a Year 9 student, echoed this sentiment by saying that sometimes the targets
‘[don’t] really tell me what to do [they] just [say] what I did wrong’. When
asked what he would find more helpful, he stated that ‘more constructive’
feedback was needed.
The literature on ‘effective feedback’
supports this viewpoint. According to Clarke (2005) ineffective
feedback is anything that is too general (such as ‘some good words here’) or
provides broad targets (such as ‘remember to include more detail’). Feedback
that focuses on ego involvement (for example, saying things like ‘Well done!’
which make the receiver feel good about themselves on a basic level) over task
involvement (for example, praise for completion of a specific skill) is another
example of ineffective feedback (Tanner & Jones, 2006). Black and Wiliam (1998)
state that feedback which ‘gave learners direct advice on how to improve, was
far more effective than marking which simply identified ‘right’ and ‘wrong’
responses’ (cited in Weedon et al., 2002, 110).
The data here suggests that students can
tell when the teacher has put time and effort into giving each student a
specific, constructive and individualized target. These types of feedback are
very beneficial because they allow students to make better progress and to push
themselves more.
Some students were not being
given sufficient time to work with, or even reflect upon, their targets
The data suggests that students in Year 7
and Year 10 have had better experiences when working with their feedback. This
could be because the Year 7s would not have experienced anything different,
while the Year 10s would have had more focus put on improvement by the teacher,
due to external pressures such as league tables, exam results and FFTD targets.
For example, Joe (Y7) said that he works
with his feedback in ‘most probably every lesson’ and that when given feedback
his class will ‘go through it all and…pick out certain things we did’ and then
‘try and put it in pieces of work’.
Similarly, all three Year 10 students
suggested that they received regular feedback and that they actively ‘tried to
improve on it’. That being said, the Year 10 students suggested that they
sometimes feel rushed, and that more time to do practical work would be
helpful. Gail, a high achieving Year 10
student, said that they ‘normally move quite quickly’ in lessons and that they
are ‘literally just doing assessment after assessment to finish [the]
coursework’. This suggests that some students have very little time to work
with specific targets. Consequently, all three Year 10 students expressed the
desire to have more time to work with their targets; Ethan, a lower achieving
student, summed their argument up by saying that he’d like to have ‘practicals
and like [more information on] how to achieve that target and how to keep using
it’.
Similarly, some students in Years 8 and 9
expressed criticism of the way they used their feedback. Debbie(Y8) said that she ‘sometimes’
incorporates her targets into her work after receiving feedback, but agreed
that more time was needed to work with targets. That being said, both Year 8
students suggested that they made use of their targets without direction from
the teacher, which suggests that independent learning is encouraged by using
the target tracking system. For example, consider Debbie and Alice’s statements
here:
Debbie: we normally like
write it…we’ve got at like in the back of our books we’ve got like a
target…like target tracker where we write it down and when we do it three times
we check it off and the teacher marks it
Alice: yah we’ve got that
as well but like we don’t check it so it just stays there and we only refer to
it like a couple of times but sometimes when I get a wish I think like oh what
was my wish…when I’m doing assessments when I go back and like is that
something I could put into this work and sometimes it is so that’s good…
This exchange suggests that the students
would benefit from more teacher directed time and monitoring over the use of
targets, especially those recorded in the target tracker. Another example can
be seen in the following extract from the interview with Year 9 students:
KC: …what do you usually
do when you get feedback from the teacher
Claire: um we have a
target like sheet in the back of our book where we write it down our targets
and when we’ve achieved it we tick um a box to say that we’ve achieved it
KC: okay what about you guys
Peter: I’m trying to achieve it the second I get it
KC: okay what about you guys
Peter: I’m trying to achieve it the second I get it
KC: okay so you try to
work with your targets straight away
Peter nods
Ben: I don’t do anything
KC: nothing
Ben: well we get told to
read it and then we like do other things
KC: okay…would you like to
do something with it do you reckon
Ben: yah cuz [the teacher]
just writes it down and just tells us to read it and like we don’t do anything
to change it
KC: okay so you would like
to have…would it be more helpful to have time to change it to work with it
Ben: yah
While this suggests that the majority of
students do get to work with their targets, it implies that some teachers are
not encouraging students to work with, and reflect upon, their targets enough.
Interestingly, this appears to be something that the students themselves would
like to do, and is reflected in the literature as being a key element of
effective feedback. For example, Black and William (1998) state that students need to have time to ‘work with evidence of their
difficulties’ (Black & William, 1998). Similarly, Quinton and Smallbone
(2013) state that teachers should allow ‘dedicated classroom time…for
reflection on written feedback’. Stiggins and Chappuis (2012) also suggest that
‘it is important to allow students time to reflect’ and offer a number of
questions and prompts for teachers to encourage this type of reflection. Class
time should be devoted to ‘rewriting selected pieces of work, so that emphasis
can be put on feedback for improvement within a supportive environment’ (Black
et al., 2002).
Students value verbal
clarification of targets alongside written feedback
Verbal feedback is useful to students
because ‘it allows them to clarify points they don’t understand and get really
personal attention from their teacher’ (Weedon et al., 2002). However, this
type of feedback isn’t always practical in the classroom, as being able to
provide 30 students with individual, oral feedback can often be impossible. As
Weedon et al. (2002) state, ‘[t]he trouble is there is only one teacher and
lots of pupils’. Tanner and Jones (2003) similarly admit that ‘oral feedback to
encourage articulation of thoughts and ideas throughout a lesson’ is important,
but acknowledge that ‘one-to-one oral feedback is not always easy’.
Throughout the interviews, the
students seemed to also acknowledge this fact. Peter (Y9) suggested that his
feedback was sometimes followed up by the teacher ‘explain[ing] it to me’,
especially if the target was unclear. Ben similarly suggested that it was
sometimes helpful to have the teacher ‘explain it [the feedback] more’. Ethan
(Y10) described how his teacher would regularly ‘explain to [him] how [he] can
achieve [his] feedback goals’. In fact, Gail
and Ethan (Y10) both suggested that they would value verbal feedback alongside
written feedback. Consider the following suggestion:
Gail:
…some time with the teacher as well [would be useful] so [they] can help out
with different students…I know it’s hard in like lessons to help like
individual students but if there’s a group of students that aren’t doing the
same – that are doing the same thing – like they need improvement [they] could
work with that group of students to help them
Ethan, towards the end of the
interview, later echoed this idea again:
Ethan:
if you had some students…like what Gail said…if you had some students that had
the same target maybe you can like put them in a group and then talk through
how to get there and how to achieve that target
However, the students also suggested
that verbal feedback does not have to come directly from the teacher; Debbie (Y8)
suggested that sometimes ‘talk[ing] to each other and tell[ing] each other what
we need to improve on’ can be just as helpful.
The Year 10 students especially valued
peer assessment; Gail described how she found it useful to ‘read other people’s
work and like use their ideas’ while Ethan similarly stated that he found it
beneficial to have someone else ‘checking your work and then you can get their
feedback and not just the teachers’. That being said, in order for peer
assessment and group work to be useful, students need to be properly trained in
how to be assessors themselves; this topic will come up again later in the paper.
Students felt that clear
boundaries and expectations are needed before and after doing an important
piece of work
Earl and Katz (2008) describe
effective feedback as information which ‘challenges ideas, introduces
additional information, offers alternative interpretations and creates
conditions for self-reflection and a review of ideas’. They also suggest that
feedback is a ‘loop’, which allows students to compare their own progress
against learning goals’ (Earl & Katz, 2008). This idea is mentioned again
in a study conducted by Peterson and Irving (2008), where they said students
were able to identify ‘an assessment-feedback learning loop’ in which feedback
‘led to more learning that was subsequently assessed, keeping the cycle going’.
Feedback should therefore be ongoing; it should become a process by which
students become comfortable adapting and revising their work, making adjustment
and improvements as necessary, based on feedback that is linked to specific
learning outcomes.
These ideas came up often in the data
as well. It was clear from the interviews which students had worked with
specific targets and assessment foci within lessons and those who may have used
these targets less often; this was reflected in the way the students spoke and
responded to some of the questions. For example, when asked by the
student-researcher what he thought of the feedback coversheets, Joe responded
by saying that he found them helpful because ‘you’re allowed them in assessment
so you can just look at what you’re doing’. He also suggested that his teacher
would ‘go through [the different assessment foci] as a class and go do AF2 AF3
AF4 AF5…’, allowing them to become comfortable with the various skills and
criteria needed to succeed. Interestingly, Joe showed more knowledge of
the assessment foci than the Year 10 student who was interviewing him, as
evidence in the extract below:
Student-researcher shows Joe a sample
coversheet
SR:
do you understand those
Joe:
confidently yah I do
SR:
shocked really
Joe:
yah don’t you understand that
SR:
well no…
Joe:
it’s like AF2 and stuff
SR:
do you know what they mean
Joe:
yah it’s like zooming in on words and stuff
Joe was also only one of two students who
was able to answer the question ‘Do you know what your teacher looks for when
marking your work’ without giving spelling, punctuation or grammar as the main
focus. His response was, again, ‘like the hidden meaning of words and stuff’. The
only other student to give a similar response was Gail, a high achieving Year
10 student (her response can be seen later in the paper).
Ben, in Year 9, suggested that
sometimes he was not given the coversheet prior to sitting an assessment, which
he felt put him at a disadvantage. When asked to clarify what he meant, he
stated that coversheets are useful ‘so like I know how to get my level which I
need’ but all three Year 9 students felt that they weren’t given enough
clarification on how to improve their targets from one level to the next.
Claire suggested that an assessment grid or checklist ‘so you know how to
achieve the levels’ would be helpful.
The Year 10 students also suggested
that having better access to clear boundaries and expectations would be
helpful. For example, Hannah describes how ‘sometimes’ she would be given a ‘B
or C grade text and an A grade text’ to compare, stating that looking at
specific levels was the most helpful way to make improvements. Gail went a bit
further, explaining how she’d make better progress if her teacher could ‘write
down points um from the mark scheme so for like an A explain how from our work
that could be improved’.
The fact that all of the students,
minus Joe and Gail, responded to the question ‘Do you know what your teacher
looks for when marking your work’ with spelling, punctuation or grammar related
foci suggests that not all students are comfortable or confident working with
the assessment foci, perhaps because they are not given sufficient
opportunities to do so. This suggests that more work is required in this area;
this links in well with the final point, which I will explore below.
Students felt they would benefit
from better training, including how to peer and self assess
Two of the interview questions
specifically required students to describe how they peer and self-assess work.
Most students had mixed feelings about these types of assessment, but much of
their discomfort comes down to insufficient training. The incident above with
Joe shows how students who work often with their targets and the assessment
foci become much more confident when working with targets and assessment foci.
However, even Joe suggested that sometimes peer assessment can be misused,
especially when ‘the friend just goes oh sorry I didn’t mean to do that and you
just get it wrong’ suggesting that sometimes students don’t take peer
assessment as seriously as they should. He also suggests that sometimes
students will mark each other generously ‘just to be kind’.
Debbie and Alice similarly suggest
that peer assessment can provide a good starting point to discuss improvements,
and that annotations from other students such as ‘this is quite good but you
could maybe put in this’ is helpful. However, both girls admit that
self-assessment is much trickier. Consider their responses below:
Debbie:
cuz you’ve done that work it’s quite hard to assess your own work and what
you’ve done and how good it is
Alice:
yah and also like we don't do it very often um and like I’m not sure how to
explain it really but if you don’t do it very often you think like…so…and if
you don’t understand what your target really means then like you get really
confused and you’re like…so do I say what I did right and give myself a target
not to do with the other assessment and…you have to incorporate everything and
it gets a bit like blah makes a funny face
KC:
okay so would you like to do more self-assessment
Alice:
well yah but I’d like to have like a lesson on how to maybe…well not a
lesson…and like explain how you could maybe write something…
Similarly, Ben and Claire (Y9) both felt
self-assessment wasn’t useful, while Paul (Y9) felt that ‘absolutely’ it was.
When asked to explain how he self-assessed his work, he went on to say that ‘if
I do the punctuation wrong I can just mark it again’ in order to fix it. This
suggests that he has been given more opportunities to self assess his work, and
therefore feels more comfortable doing it. However, it also links into the
student-held-belief that spelling, punctuation and grammar are the only things
that students can self-assess their work for.
The Year 10 students were also much less
comfortable doing self-assessment. While Ethan, the lowest achiever in the
group, found it useful (stating that it helps him to ‘find the stuff that
[he’s] missed’) those students, like Gail and Hannah, who are mid-to-high
achievers find it hard because they aren’t sure how to be critical of
themselves. For example, consider the following extract:
Gail: I think we
have [self-assessed] once but I don’t find it that useful because you might be
too harsh on yourself or too like gestures as if unsure of what to say
not harsh on yourself so you might give yourself lower on a good grade and then
it’s not that great so it’s not that useful
Hannah nods
in agreement
KC: don’t like
self-assessment Hannah?
Hannah: no
KC: why not
Hannah: I always
mark myself too low
This may be because students who are
working at higher levels will doubt their ability to do the ‘tougher’ high
level skills, such as probing for sub-text and meaning, whereas lower level
students will be able to pick out simpler skills to improve upon, such as
spelling, punctuation and grammar; When asked what the teacher looks for when
marking work, Ethan’s response was, much like the students in Year 8 and 9,
‘high quality punctuation and spelling because that’s the most important
thing’, whereas Gail felt that teachers look for work that is ‘short and to the
point’ and includes ‘point, evidence and explanation’. This suggests that
better training (of the students) is needed to allow students to become more
confortable looking at different levels of work, so that they can more easily
recognise good work when they see it, even when assessing their own work.
Conclusion
As you can see, this research has
highlighted some interesting areas for further development within the school in
which the research took place, as well as in further academic study. The
findings suggest a few areas where feedback is being used well within the
English faculty, but also suggests areas where improvement is needed. Essentially,
students are finding the two stars and a wish policy to be very helpful,
especially when they are given sufficient time to work with and improve upon
their targets. Giving students constructive criticism alongside a recognition
of their strengths is beneficial because, according to Gail (Y10), it allows
students to ‘see if [they’re] consistently using those strengths’. Nearly all
of the students involved in the study felt that two stars and a wish was an
improvement on previous methods of feedback because it allows students to
‘pinpoint [their] weaknesses and…strengths…[so that their] weaknesses can be
developed’ (Ethan, Y10). Students also show greater confidence in their own
ability and understanding when they work with specific targets and assessment
foci on a daily basis. However, more training is needed to allow students to
become comfortable with using and understanding their targets, especially when
used in conjunction with peer and self-assessment.
Interview questions used in
pilot-interviews
1. When was the last time you got
feedback in English? What was the feedback? Can you give examples? How useful
was it?
2. What do you find useful when
getting feedback from your teacher? (Why?)
3. What don’t you like when
getting feedback from your teacher? (Why?)
4. What do you usually do with the
teacher feedback? How often do you get the opportunity to work with your
targets?
5. What usually happens when you
get feedback in English? How is feedback followed up?
6. How do you do peer assessment?
7. Do you self-assess your own
work in English? How do you do this?
8. Are there times when you don’t
get feedback, but you’d like to?
9. How are you told about moving
from one level to the next?
1 10. Do you know what your teacher
looks for when assessing your work?
References
Black, P., & King’s College London. School of Education. (2002). Working
inside the black box: assessment
for learning in the classroom. London: King’s College (Department of Education & Professional Studies)
Black, P. J. &
Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box:
raising standards through classroom assessment.
London: King’s College London
Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. (2005). Formative
assessment: improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris:
OECD.
Clarke, S. (2005). Formative assessment in the
secondary classroom. London: Hodder Murray
Drever, E. (2003). Using
semi-structured interviews in small-scale research: a teacher’s guide
(Rev., Vol. 15). Glasgow: Scottish
Council for Research in Education.
Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. (2001).
British Educational Research Association. Retrieved
from http://www.bera.ac.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2013/12/BERA-Ethical- Guidelines-2011.pdf
Flutter, J., & Rudduck, J. (2004). Consulting
pupils [electronic resource]: what’s
in it for schools? London ;
New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Gamlem, S. M., & Smith, K. (2013). Student
perceptions of classroom feedback. Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(2),
150–169
Hargreaves, E. (2013). Inquiring into children’s experiences of teacher feedback: reconceptualising Assessment for
Learning. Oxford Review of Education, 39(2),
229–246.
Peterson, E. R., & Irving, S. E. (2008). Secondary
school students’ conceptions
of assessment and f eedback.
Learning and Instruction, 18(3),
238–250
Quinton, S., & Smallbone, T. (2010). Feeding forward:
using feedback to promote student reflection
and learning – a teaching model. Innovations in Education and
Teaching International,
47(1), 125–135
Stiggins, R. J., & Chappuis, J. (2012). An
introduction to student-involved assessment for learning
(6th ed.). Boston, Mass. ;London:
Pearson,.
Swaffield, S. (2008). Unlocking
assessment: understanding for reflection and application.
London ;New
York: Routledge.
Taber, Keith S. (2013) Building theory from data:
grounded theory. In Wilson, E. (Ed), School- based research: a guide for
education students (pp. 270-283). London: SAGE.
Tanner, H., 1951-, & Jones,
S., 1953-. (2003). Marking and assessment. London:
Continuum
Tanner, H., 1951- & Jones, S., 1953-, - Marking and
assessment. (2006). Assessment: a practical guide
for secondary teachers (2nd ed.). London: Continuum.
Weeden, P., 1950-, Winter, J., 1956-, & Broadfoot, P.
(2002). Assessment: what’s in it for schools? London: RoutledgeFalmer,.
William, D. (2009). Assessment
for learning: why, what and how? London: Institute of Education, University
of London.