Feedback in the Wild: Discrepancies between Academics’ and Students’ Views on the Intended Purpose and Desired Type of Feedback

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Getting feedback on assignments is as ubiquitous of an educational experience as anything. The goal of feedback is to move students from where their skills and knowledge currently lie to some end criteria identified by the instructor. The present study highlights the gap between theory and practice by comparing undergraduate students’ views on the purposes and idealized content of feedback to those of academics. The results suggest a shared understanding of the purpose of feedback. However, students do not necessarily want feedback that reflects those purposes. The relationship between students’ views on feedback and their actual experiences with feedback are briefly discussed, as are the implications of the findings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationISLS Annual Meeting 2021 Reflecting the Past and Embracing the Future - 15th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS 2021
EditorsErica de Vries, Yotam Hod, June Ahn
PublisherInternational Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS)
Pages525-528
Number of pages4
ISBN (Electronic)9781737330615
StatePublished - 2021
Event15th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS 2021 - Virtual, Online
Duration: Jun 8 2021Jun 11 2021

Publication series

NameProceedings of International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS
ISSN (Print)1814-9316

Conference

Conference15th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS 2021
CityVirtual, Online
Period6/8/216/11/21

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© ISLS.

Keywords

  • Feedback
  • Learning Outcomes
  • Motivation
  • Teaching

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Feedback in the Wild: Discrepancies between Academics’ and Students’ Views on the Intended Purpose and Desired Type of Feedback'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this