Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Written Teacher Feedback: Aspects of Quality, Benefits and Challenges

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Transforming Assessment

Part of the book series: Contributions from Science Education Research ((CFSE,volume 4))

Abstract

Written feedback provided by the teacher to his or her students is an important aspect of formative assessment. After a theoretical introduction to teacher prerequisites for giving feedback and to the quality of written feedback in general, results from an implementation of feedback methods in classrooms will be described for the cases of Germany, Switzerland and Denmark. The focus will be on the inquiry method ‘investigation in science’ that requires from students such competences as planning and/or conducting experiments. This study examines the quality of written teacher feedback which was provided based on rubrics and templates for open comments. For this purpose, written teacher feedback itself, student artefacts and data from questionnaires were analysed. Furthermore, the benefits and challenges that teachers noticed in using written feedback will be examined. Finally, it will be discussed which means of support for teachers seem necessary in order to foster the implementation of written teacher feedback as part of formative assessment in inquiry-based science education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abd El Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R. A., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, H. (2000). Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educational Leadership, 57(5), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, H. (2005). Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching, 53(1), 27–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2005). Student perspectives on rubric-referenced assessment. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(3), 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arter, J. A., & McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring rubrics in the classroom: Using performance criteria for assessing and improving student performance. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arts, J. G., Jaspers, M., & Joosten-ten Brinke, D. (2016). A case study on written comments as a form of feedback in teacher education: So much to gain. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 159–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R., & Garner, M. (2010). Is the feedback in higher education assessment worth the paper it is written on? Teachers’ reflections on their practices. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(2), 187–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2011). Teaching skillful teaching. The Effective Educator, 68(4), 40–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bharuthram, S. (2015). Lecturers’ perceptions: The value of assessment rubrics for informing teaching practice and curriculum review and development. Africa Education Review, 12(3), 415–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Harrison, C. (2004). Science inside the black box. London: GL Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. London: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, G. T. L., Harris, L. R., & Harnett, J. A. (2012). Teacher beliefs about feedback within an Assessment for learning environment: Endorsement of improved learning over student well-being. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(7), 968–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruno, I., & Santos, L. (2010). Written comments as a form of feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 36, 111–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, K. (2006). From standards to rubrics in 6 steps. Heatherton: Hawker Brownlow Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey, J. E., Hammer, D., Levin, D. M., & Grant, T. (2011). The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1109–1136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L., Ancess, J., & Falk, B. (1995). Authentic assessment in action: Studies of schools and students at work. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • D-EDK Deutschschweizer Erziehungsdirektoren-Konferenz. (2014). Lehrplan 21. http://vorlage.lehrplan.ch/downloads.php [15.12.2015].

  • Furtak, E. M. (2012). Linking a learning progression for natural selection to teachers’ enactment of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1181–1210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furtak, E. M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shemwell, J. T., Ayala, C. C., Brandon, P. R., Shavelson, R. J., & Yin, Y. (2008). On the fidelity of implementing embedded formative assessments and its relation to student learning. Applied Measurement in Education, 21(4), 360–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furtak, E. M., Kiemer, K., Circi, R. K., Swanson, R., de León, V., Morrison, D., & Heredia, S. C. (2016). Teachers’ formative assessment abilities and their relationship to student learning: Findings from a four-year intervention study. Instructional Science, 44, 267–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gearhart, M., Nagashima, S., Pfotenhauer, J., Clark, S., Schwab, C., Vendlinski, T., Osmundson, E., Herman, J., & Bernbaum, D. J. (2006). Developing expertise with classroom assessment in K–12 science: Learning to interpret student work. Interim findings from a 2-year study. Educational Assessment, 11(3–4), 237–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glover, C., & Brown, E.. (2006). “Written Feedback for Students: Too Much, Too Detailed or Too Incomprehensible to Be Effective?” BEE-J 7. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/beej.7.1d.pdf.

  • Hammer, D., & van Zee, E. (2006). Seeing the science in children’s thinking: Case studies of student inquiry in physical science. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harks, B., Rakoczy, K., Hattie, J., Besser, M., & Klieme, E. (2014). The effects of feedback on achievement, interest and self-evaluation: The role of feedback’ s perceived usefulness. Educational Psychology, 34(3), 269–290. doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.785384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson, A. (2014). Rubrics as a way of providing transparency in assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in higher education, 39(7), 840–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazemi, E., & Franke, M. L. (2004). Teacher learning in mathematics: Using student work to promote collective inquiry. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 7, 203–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingston, N., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative Assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30(4), 28–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluger, A., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobarg, M. & Seidel, T. (2007). Prozessorientierte Lernbegleitung – Videoanalysen im Physikunterricht der Sekundarstufe I [Process-oriented teaching – Video analyses in high school physics instruction]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 35(2), 148–168. Retrieved from http://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2012/5490/

  • Köller, O. (2005). Formative Assessment in classrooms: A review of the empirical German literature. In OECD (Ed.), Formative Assessment. Improving learning in secondary classrooms (pp. 266–280). Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, D., Hammer, D., & Coffey, J. (2009). Novice teachers’ attention to student thinking. Journal of Teacher Education, 60, 142–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (Eds.). (2004). Internet environments for science education. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipnevich, A. A., McCallen, L. N., Pace Miles, K., & Smith, J. K. (2014). Mind the gap! Students’ use of exemplars and detailed rubrics as formative assessment. Instructional Science, 42, 539–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & DiRanna, K. (2008). The data coach’s guide to improving learning for all students: Unleashing the power of collaborative inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luft, J. A. (1999). Rubrics: Design and use in science teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(2), 107–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J., & Arthur, S. (1977). Teacher comments on student essays: It doesn’t matter what you say. ERIC Document Reproduction Service: ED 147 864.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayring, P. (2004). Qualitative content analysis. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 2662–2669). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministerium für Schule und Berufsbildung. (2016). Fachanforderungen Chemie. Allgemeinbildende Schulen. [Chemistry curriculum for lower secondary schools]. Retrieved from http://lehrplan.lernnetz.de/intranet1/index.php?wahl=199.

  • Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction – What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moni, R. W., & Moni, K. B. (2008). Student perceptions and use of an assessment rubric for a group concept map in physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(1), 47–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moskal, B. M. (2003). Recommendations for developing classroom performance assessments and scoring rubrics. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(14), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ni, Y. (1997). Performance-based assessment: Problems and design strategies. Education Journal, 25(2), 137–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative Assessment and self-regulated learning: A Model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, J. A., & Dolin, J. (2016). Evaluering mellem mestring og præstation. [Assessment between mastery and performance]. MONA, 1, 51–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, C. (2004). A avaliação como regulação do processo de ensino aprendizagem da Matemática [Assessment and regulation of the teaching in mathematics education]. Lisbon: Lisbon University.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2005). Formative assessment. Improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2013). Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment. OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orsmond, P., & Merry, S. (2011). Feedback alignment: Effective and ineffective links between tutors’ and students’ understanding of coursework feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36, 125–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parr, J., & Timperley, H. S. (2010). Feedback to writing, assessment for teaching and learning and student progress. Assessing Writing, 15, 68–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rönnebeck, S., Bernholt, S., & Ropohl, M. (2016). Searching for a common ground – A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities. Studies in Science Education, 52(2), 161–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, K. J., Garnier, H. E., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., & Wickler, N. I. Z. (2011). Video based lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 117–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Li, M. (2013). Analyzing teachers’ feedback practices in response to students’ work in science classrooms. Applied Measurement in Education, 26(3), 163–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Li, M., Ayala, C., & Shavelson, R. J. (2004). Evaluating students’ science notebooks as an assessment tool. International Journal of Science Education, 26(12), 1477–1506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russ, R. S., Coffey, J. E., Hammer, D., & Hutchison, P. (2009). Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking. Science Education, 93, 875–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santos, L., & Dias, S. (2006). Como entendem os alunos o que lhes dizem os professores? A complexidade do feedback [How do the students understand what the teachers say? On the complexity of feedback]. ProfMat 2006. Lisboa: APM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiepe-Tiska, A., Schmidtner, S., Müller, K., Heine, J.-H., Neumann, K., & Lüdtke, O. (2016). Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht in Deutschland in PISA 2015 im internationalen Vergleich [Science teaching in Germany in PISA 2015 – results from the international comparison]. In. K. Reiss, C. Sälzer, A. Schiepe-Tiska, E. Klieme, & O. Köller (Eds.), PISA 2015 – eine Studie zwischen Kontinuität und Innovation (pp. 133–176). Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, D., & Dillon, D. (1980). The message of marking: Teacher written responses to student writing at intermediate grade levels. Research in the Teaching of English, 14, 233–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smit, R., & Birri, T. (2014). Assuring the quality of standards-oriented classroom assessment with rubrics for complex competencies. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 43(December), 5–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • So, W. W. M., & Lee, T. T. H. (2011). Influence of teachers‘perceptions of teaching and learning on the implementation of assessment for learning in inquiry study. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 18(4), 417–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment FOR learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 758–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stracke, E., & Kumar, V. (2010). Feedback and self-regulated learning: Insights from supervisors’ and Ph.D. examiners’ reports. Reflective Practice, 11(1), 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuck, J. (2012). Feedback-giving as social practice: Teachers’ perspectives on feedback as institutional requirement, work and dialogue. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(2), 209–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vögeli-Mantovani, U. (1999). SKBF Trendbericht Nr. 3: Mehr fördern, weniger auslesen. Zur Entwicklung der schulischen Beurteilung in der Schweiz [SKBF trend report no. 3: More support, less selection. On the development of educational assessment in Switzerland]. Aarau: Schweizerische Koordinationsstelle für Bildungsforschung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, G. P. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wollenschläger, M., Möller, J., & Harms, U. (2011). Effekte kompetenzieller Rückmeldung beim wissenschaftlichen Denken [Effects of competential feedback on performance in scientific reasoning]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 25(3), 197–202.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Science and Technology Education, University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland, Basel, Switzerland

    Monika Holmeier & Regula Grob

  2. Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Jan Alexis Nielsen

  3. Leibniz-Institute for Science and Mathematics Education (IPN), Kiel, Germany

    Silke Rönnebeck & Mathias Ropohl

  4. Kiel University, Kiel, Germany

    Silke Rönnebeck

Authors
  1. Monika Holmeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Regula Grob
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Alexis Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Silke Rönnebeck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mathias Ropohl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Monika Holmeier .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Jens Dolin

  2. Department of Science Education, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Robert Evans

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Holmeier, M., Grob, R., Nielsen, J.A., Rönnebeck, S., Ropohl, M. (2018). Written Teacher Feedback: Aspects of Quality, Benefits and Challenges. In: Dolin, J., Evans, R. (eds) Transforming Assessment. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 4. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63248-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63248-3_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63247-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63248-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation