The motivational paradox of feedback: teacher and student perceptions

Abstract

The notion that future performance can be affected by information about previous performance is often expressed in terms of ‘closing the gap’. Feedback has long been recognised as a mechanism through which teaching and learning may be influenced. The current wave of support in the United Kingdom for assessment for learning echoes these sentiments. This paper examines the feedback strategies employed by two experienced literacy practitioners in England. Using data gathered from field observations, interviews and documentary sources, the paper presents evidence of espoused practice associated with feedback, demonstrating that whilst teachers may claim that they make effective use of some feedback strategies to support pupils’ learning and motivation, that this is not supported by empirical data. The paper also identifies that whilst some teachers aim to mark every piece of pupils’ written work for perceived motivational benefits; such a strategy can undermine pupils’ intrinsic motivation and lead to a culture of over‐dependency, whereby the locus of control with regard to feedback lies solely with the teacher. The paper concludes by exploring some possible implications for practice with regard to the provision of written feedback in particular.

To feed back or to feed forward?

“…Although it is widely accepted that feedback impacts learning greatly, there still is not much detailed classroom research on how feedback actually works (Murtagh, 2014). Therefore, several researchers have called for more feedback research, for instance teacher-research, in "naturalistic classroom contexts to explore the real needs of teachers and students" (Lee, 2014, p. 1; see also Bitchener & Ferris, 2012;Hyland, 2010;Jakobson 2015).…”

Developing understanding of pupil feedback using Habermas’ notion of communicative action

“…Studies which are more classroom-bound and qualitative illustrate how what happens in classrooms is often based on quite formal and prescribed notions of feedback. Murtagh (2014) examines the practices of two primary school teachers, who despite being clear of their own intentions of using feedback to enhance learning, seem to fall short of what they aim to achieve. Similarly, Hargreaves (2013) gleans information from the children about how they experience teacher feedback in order to try and ascertain its impact on their learning.…”

“…This seems quite different from the practices in classrooms. Within teaching and learning contexts, which are increasingly objective with prescribed goal orientations, feedback seems tightly focused and often fairly unproblematic (Murtagh, 2014). Teachers frequently offer targeted feedback on which pupils should act.…”

A Qualitative Inquiry of Students' and Teachers' Perceptions on Feedback in Three Queensland Secondary Schools

“…However, Budge (2011) found that 27% of students preferred private handwritten feedback over other modes of feedback. In addition, Murtagh's (2014) case study on primary school students' perceptions of feedback also found that students perceived descriptive, written feedback was more valuable and provided more useful feedback than handwritten evaluative ticks and crosses. However, a teacher involved in Zacharias' (2007) study on teachers' and students' attitudes towards feedback stated that providing adequate detail in written feedback was timeconsuming.…”

“…Indeed, a participant in Murtagh's (2014) case study of two experienced literacy teachers in the UK stated that handwritten feedback is "so difficult to manage though, because of time… it can be hard and takes a lot of time" (p. 532). In addition, handwritten feedback may be unsuitable for students with literacy difficulties as they may find the feedback difficult to read and comprehend (Brookhart, 2008 …”