Feedback literacy for digital futures

1. Feedback literacy for digital futures
David Carless
University of Hong Kong
@CarlessDavid
April 30, 2021
Auckland University of Technology
The University of Hong Kong

2. Overview
1. Feedback challenges & strategies
2. Digital feedback possibilities
3. Feedback literacy
4. Implications
The University of Hong Kong

3. PROBLEMS THAT FEEDBACK
LITERACY MIGHT ADDRESS
The University of Hong Kong

4. Feedback challenges
1. Timing of feedback
2. Difficulties in decoding feedback
3. Lack of strategies for using feedback
4. Feedback arouses emotional reactions
5. Too much feedback as telling
The University of Hong Kong

5. Teacher workload
“The generation of information to students
about their work is time-consuming. It
cannot be justified if there is no explicit
expectation that it will be used”. (Boud &
Molloy, 2013a, p. 206).
The University of Hong Kong

6. Feedback does double duty
Competing audiences & functions of teacher
comments:
- Justifying grade
- Offering advice
- Specific vs generic comments
- Quality assurance dimensions
(Winstone & Carless, in press)
The University of Hong Kong

7. Feedback designs
Shift from the provision of comments to the
design of learning environments
(Boud & Molloy, 2013b)
The University of Hong Kong

8. Paradigm shift
From teachers delivering comments
To what learners do: self-generated
feedback; using comments
The University of Hong Kong

9. Comments  uptake
The University of Hong Kong
Teachers produce comments
Focus on delivery
Students generate insights
Focus on uptake
(Carless, 2015; Winstone & Carless, 2019)

10. The University of Hong Kong
DISCOUNT CODE:
FLR40

11. DIGITAL FEEDBACK DESIGNS
The University of Hong Kong

12. Teacher role
Design learning environments for students
to generate feedback
The University of Hong Kong

13. The University of Hong Kong

14. Audio peer feedback
Feeling personally committed
Understanding own learning processes
Comparing own work with that of peers
(Filius et al., 2019)
The University of Hong Kong

15. Learning by comparison
Peer feedback outcome: learners compare
own work with that of others & then revise
(Nicol, 2020; van Popta et al., 2017)
The University of Hong Kong

16. Peer video feedback
Peer-to-peer video feedback delivered via
Facebook
Hung (2016)
The University of Hong Kong

17. Audio/video feedback modes
Enable rapport &
nuance
You can talk faster than you can write
The University of Hong Kong

18. Teacher video feedback
Video feedback enables social presence
Allied with student response or follow-up
(Mahoney et al. 2019)
The University of Hong Kong

19. Screencasting
Digital recording of users’ screen combined
with voice narration e.g.
Screencasting & re-drafting on Google Docs
(Wood, 2020)
The University of Hong Kong

20. Feedback design
Assessment task 1
Assessment task 2
Assessment task 3
The University of Hong Kong

21. Emoticons & feedback
Embedding emoticons enhanced students’
perceptions of instructor social presence &
accessibility (Padgett et al., 2021)
The University of Hong Kong

22. Social media feedback
The University of Hong Kong

23. Thoughts so far …?
Sharing, questions, comments
The University of Hong Kong

24. THE ROLE OF FEEDBACK
LITERACY
The University of Hong Kong

25. Defining student feedback literacy
Understandings, capacities & dispositions
needed to use feedback for improvement
(Carless & Boud, 2018).
The University of Hong Kong

26. Student feedback literacy
The University of Hong Kong
Making
Judgments
Appreciating
Feedback
Managing
Affect
Taking Action
(Carless & Boud, 2018)

27. Defining teacher feedback literacy
“Knowledge, expertise & dispositions to
design feedback processes in ways which
enable student uptake of feedback”
(Carless & Winstone, 2020, p. 4)
The University of Hong Kong

28. (Carless & Winstone, 2020)

29. Feedback literacy competency framework
Macro – Program design & development
Meso – Unit design & implementation
Micro – Individual assignments
(Boud & Dawson, 2021)
The University of Hong Kong

30. Implications & future
directions
The University of Hong Kong

31. Disciplines & feedback
Disciplinary nature of feedback practices
(e.g. Esterhazy, 2018)
Signature feedback practices (Carless et al.,
2020)
Discipline-specific feedback literacies
(Winstone, Balloo & Carless, 2020)
The University of Hong Kong

32. Partnership
Students as partners meets feedback
research & practice
(Matthews et al., 2021)
The University of Hong Kong

33. Shared feedback literacy
Learning designs or program designs to
enable the mutual development of teacher &
student feedback literacy
The University of Hong Kong

34. References
Boud, D. & Dawson, P. (2021). What feedback literate teachers do: An empirically-derived competency framework. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education
Boud, D. & Molloy, E. (2013a). Decision-making for feedback. In D. Boud & E. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in Higher and Professional
Education. London: Routledge.
Boud, D. & Molloy, E. (2013b). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712.
Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in University Assessment. London: Routledge.
Carless, D. & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354.
Carless, D., To, J., Kwan, C. & Kwok, J., (2020). Disciplinary perspectives on feedback practices: Towards signature feedback
practices. Teaching in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1863355.
Carless, D. & N. Winstone (2020). Teacher feedback literacy and its interplay with student feedback literacy, Teaching in Higher
Education. doi:10.1080/13562517.2020.1782372
Chong, S.W. (2020). Reconsidering student feedback literacy from an ecological perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education.
Clarke, J. L., & Boud, D. (2018). Refocusing portfolio assessment: Curating for feedback and portrayal. Innovations in Education
and Teaching International, 55(4), 479-486.
Dawson, P., D. Carless, and P. P. W. Lee. (2020.) Authentic feedback: Supporting learners to engage in disciplinary feedback
practices.Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1769022
Esterhazy, R. (2018). What matters for productive feedback? Disciplinary practices and their relational dynamics. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education 43 (8): 1302-1314.
Filius, R., R. de Kleijn, S. Uijl, F. Prins, H. van Rijen & D. Grobbee (2019). Audio peer feedback to promote deep learning in online
education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jcal.12363
Gravett, K. (2020). Feedback literacies as sociomaterial practice. Critical Studies in Education. doi:
10.1080/17508487.2020.1747099
The University of Hong Kong

35. References (continued)
Hung, S.-T.A. (2016). Enhancing feedback provision through multimodal video technology. Computers & Education, 98,
90-101.
Mahoney, P., S. Macfarlane, and R. Ajjawi. (2019). A Qualitative Synthesis of Video Feedback in Higher
Education.”Teaching in Higher Education 24 (2): 157-179. doi:10.1080/13562517.2018.1471457
Malecka, B. Boud, D. & Carless, D. (2020). Eliciting, processing and enacting feedback: Mechanisms for embedding
feedback literacy within the curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1754784
Matthews, K., Tai, J., Enright, E., Carless, D., Rafferty, C. & Winstone, N. (2021). Transgressing the boundaries of
‘students as partners’ and ‘feedback’ discourse communities to advance democratic education. Teaching in Higher
Education https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1903854
Molloy, E., Boud, D., & Henderson, M. (2020). Developing a learning-centred framework for feedback literacy.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(4), 527-540.
Nicol, D. (2020) The power of internal feedback: Exploiting natural comparison processes. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1823314
Padgett, C., Moffitt, R., & Grieve, R. (2021). More than words: Using digital cues to enhance student perceptions of
online assignment feedback. The Internet and Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2020.100789
Van Popta, E. et al. (2017). Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider. Educational
Research Review, 20, 24-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.10.003
Winstone, N., Balloo, K. & Carless, D. (2020). Discipline-specific feedback literacies: A framework for curriculum
design. Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00632-0
Winstone, N., & Carless, D. (2021, in press). Who is feedback for? The influence of accountability and quality
assurance agendas on the enactment of feedback processes. Assessment in Education
Wood, J. (2020). A dialogic technology-mediated model of feedback uptake and literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education.
The University of Hong Kong

36. THANK YOU
The University of Hong Kong

37. Enhanced implementation of PF
• Scaffolding & coaching
• Selling benefits
• Modelling
• Multiple reviews e.g. trios
• Leveraging comparisons
• Opportunities for dialogue then revision
The University of Hong Kong

38. Feedback requests
• Learners eliciting comments on areas of
interest
• Stating preference for more critical or
more encouraging feedback
• Stating preference for modes of feedback
The University of Hong Kong

39. Curated eportfolios
E-portfolios for eliciting, processing and
using feedback
Curated for feedback
(Clarke & Boud, 2018; Malecka, Boud &
Carless, 2020)
The University of Hong Kong

40. Empirical work on student feedback literacy
1. Commits to feedback as improvement;
2. appreciates feedback as active process;
3. elicits information to improve learning;
4. processes feedback information;
5. acknowledges & works with emotions;
6. recognizes feedback as reciprocal process;
7. and enacts outcomes of feedback
(Molloy et al. 2020)
The University of Hong Kong

41. Authentic feedback
Processes resembling the feedback
practices of the discipline, profession or
workplace
(Dawson, Carless & Lee, 2020)
The University of Hong Kong

42. Learning theories deployed
Social constructivism (Carless & Boud,
2018; Winstone & Carless, 2019)
Sociocultural theory (Chong, 2020;
Esterhazy, 2018)
Sociomaterialism (Gravett, 2020)
The University of Hong Kong

43. Critiques of feedback literacy
Assumes more agency than students (&
teachers) may possess (Gravett 2020)
Might be construed as a deficit model of
students (or teachers)
Definition & scope of ‘literacies’
The University of Hong Kong

44. Competency framework
Macro e.g. plans feedback strategically
Meso e.g. timing, sequencing
Micro e.g. responds to students’ needs
(Boud & Dawson, 2021)
The University of Hong Kong

45. Common enterprise
Teachers need to accommodate to existing
levels of student feedback literacy & design
to extend student feedback literacy further
… but not all teachers are in a position to
influence design dimensions
(Boud & Dawson, 2021)
The University of Hong Kong

46. The University of Hong Kong