Errors and feedback > Feedback design

Question 5
What are the linguistic features of feedback that help students engage with and use feedback in an online mathematical task at hand and in future mathematical activities?

• André Heck

In formative assessments, students typically get feedback on their response; the task designer has to make many choices about the linguistic content of this feedback.

What motivates this question?

There is a risk of a feedback gap between the task designer and the students, who do not understand or cannot engage with the information given to them. Possible issues include:

• the feedback is too technical or in condensed mathematical language instead of a ‘language for learning’;
• steps in elaborated feedback, such a worked-out example, are too big;
• the feedback does not help students develop their ability to choose and use mathematical methods and techniques in other tasks.

See also Shute’s (2008) review of research on formative feedback, which highlights issues such as the use of elaborated feedback and the complexity of feedback.

What might an answer look like?

The question could be addressed through experimental studies in which various forms of feedback are evaluated in various mathematical domains with a focus on their effectiveness. A first step toward this would be identifying a range of linguistic features that are currently used to different extents in feedback.

It may also be fruitful to carry out qualitative investigation based on interviews with students; e.g. recent work has explored students’ interpretations of written feedback on proofs (Byrne et al., 2018). Robinson, Loch & Croft (2015) used a student survey to explore how students perceived generic feedback on a mathematics assignment provided via screencasts. Kalyuga (2015) explored a cognitive load perspective on balancing learner guidance and feedback.

Related questions

• Desirable linguistic features of feedback may depend on the students: Q7: How can feedback that is dynamically tailored to the student’s level of mathematical expertise help a student use feedback on mathematical tasks effectively?
• The issue of whether to include specific reference to the student’s answer is relevant to Q10: Under what circumstances is diagnosing errors worth the extra effort, as compared with generally addressing errors known to be typical?
• The content of feedback is also considered in Q4: How can content-specific features of provided feedback, for instance explanations with examples versus generic explanations, support students’ learning?
• Linguistic features may moderate how students interact with the feedback, as in Q13: How do students interact with an e-assessment system?

References

Byrne, M., Hanusch, S., Moore, R. C., & Fukawa-Connelly, T. (2018). Student Interpretations of Written Comments on Graded Proofs. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 4(2), 228–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-017-0059-0

Kalyuga, S. (2015). Instructional Guidance. Charlottte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Robinson, M., Loch, B. & Croft, T. (2015). Student Perceptions of Screencast Feedback on Mathematics Assessment. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 1(3), 363–385 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-015-0018-6

Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on Formative Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795