1. Towards broader
conceptions of feedback
Professor David Carless,
University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong Association for Applied
Linguistics (HAAL),
November 7th 2019
The University of Hong Kong
2. Overview
1. Feedback in AL vs elsewhere
2. Activating students in feedback
3. Designing effective feedback processes
4. Challenges & Implications
The University of Hong Kong
3. CNEC Lee I Yao Memorial Secondary
School, Kwai Shing (1988-89)
The University of Hong Kong
7. Key aim of feedback
To enhance student
ability to self-monitor
their work in
progress
The University of Hong Kong
8. Sustainable feedback
Students seeking, generating & using
feedback from peers & self as part of self-
regulated learning (Carless et al., 2011)
The University of Hong Kong
10. Social constructivist
Action on feedback is constructed through
learner agency & interaction (O’Donovan,
Rust & Price, 2016).
The University of Hong Kong
18. Defining peer feedback (PF)
“A communication process through which
learners enter into dialogues related to
performance & standards” (Liu & Carless,
2006, p. 280)
Also peer response (Liu & Hansen, 2002)
Peer review (Harland et al., 2017)
The University of Hong Kong
19. Main challenges
• Students don’t take it seriously
• Poor quality PF
• Students prefer teacher feedback
• Classmates may steal ideas
The University of Hong Kong
20. Composing peer feedback
Providing feedback more cognitively engaging
than receiving feedback (e.g. Nicol et al., 2014)
The University of Hong Kong
22. To give is better than to receive
Students taught to give PF, improved writing
more than students taught to use PF
Explanation: You review in your own ZPD
but may not receive in your ZPD
(Lundstrom & Baker, 2009)
The University of Hong Kong
23. Cumulative peer feedback
Need for multiple cumulative experiences of
peer review during a programme
(Harland et al., 2017).
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
25. Training for PF
Used sample essay to model feedback
Implemented two cycles of PF
Coached students in improving PF
(see also Min, 2006)
The University of Hong Kong
26. 4 step training procedure
Peer feedback as:
1. Clarifying the writer’s intention
2. Identifying potential problems
3. Explaining the nature of the problems
4. Making specific suggestions
The University of Hong Kong
27. Design features
Student writing: same genre, different topics
Randomly assigned trios
Written feedback + oral dialogue
The University of Hong Kong
28. Positive outcomes
Students appreciated & used peer feedback
Students got better at giving peer feedback
Lower achievers benefitted significantly
(Winstone & Carless, 2019, chapter 8)
The University of Hong Kong
34. Variation 2
“The previous feedback that I have used to
strengthen this assignment is ….”
(Barton et al. 2016)
The University of Hong Kong
35. ELT Variation A
Students complete the following prompt:
“The grammar item I would like to receive
focused corrective feedback on is …”
The University of Hong Kong
36. ELT Variation B
“I would most like to receive feedback on”
(choose one):
grammar accuracy;
content and ideas;
other (pls specify)
The University of Hong Kong
43. Broader conceptions of feedback
Beyond teacher telling to highlight:
• Peer feedback
• Student self-evaluation
• Student feedback seeking
• Dialogic interaction
The University of Hong Kong
45. References
Barton, K. L., Schofield, S. J., McAleer, S., & Ajjawi, R. (2016). Translating evidence-based guidelines to improve
feedback practices: The interact case study. BMC Medical Education, 16(1). doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0562-z
Bloxham, S. & Campbell. L. (2010). Generating dialogue in assessment feedback: Exploring the use of interactive cover
sheets. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 291-300.
Carless, D. & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M. & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher
Education, 36(4), 395-407.
Harland, T., Wald, N., & Randhawa, H. (2017). Student peer review: Enhancing formative feedback with a rebuttal.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(5), 801-811.
Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. Michigan: University of Michigan
Press.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, K. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own
writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30-43.
Min, H.-T. (2006). The Effects of Trained Peer Review on EFL Students’ Revision Types and Writing Quality. Journal of
Second Language Writing 15 (2): 118-141.
Nash, R., & Winstone, N. (2017). Responsibility-sharing in the giving and receiving of assessment feedback. Frontiers
in Psychology, 8, 1519. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01519
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review
perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122.
O’Donovan, B., Rust, C., & Price, M. (2016). A scholarly approach to solving the feedback dilemma in practice.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 938–949.
The University of Hong Kong
48. Key Rationales for PF
Involve students in dialogue
around the quality of work
Inform student self-evaluation
Potentially timely &
sustainable
The University of Hong Kong
50. Peer feedback trios
Peer feedback trios facilitate composing and
receiving more than one peer review
(van den Berg, Admiraal & Pilot, 2006)
The University of Hong Kong
51. Grading peer feedback
Grading student peer reviews enhances
student motivation & accountability
The University of Hong Kong
52. ICS Variation
1. The strengths are …
2. The aspects for development are …
3. I would like feedback on …
The University of Hong Kong