Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Hepplestone, Stuart; Chikwa, Gladson (2014)
Publisher: University of Cumbria
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: 002_The_Book, Z48

Classified by OpenAIRE into

This paper presents the results of a small-scale qualitative study conducted at a UK university in which a sample of undergraduate students were asked to reflect on the (often subconscious) processes they use to engage with, act upon, store and recall feedback. Through the use of micro-blogging, weekly diaries and semi-structured interviews, the study found that students understand what feedback is and how it should be used. Students recognise the impact of technology in enhancing the feedback process, especially in supporting dialogue around feedback. However, the study highlighted that students often struggle to make connections between the feedback that they receive and future assignments, and it is recommended that further investigation is required into how tutors construct the feedback given and how students deconstruct that feedback, along with the role that technology might play in enabling students to make sense of all feedback that they\ud receive.\ud \ud Key words\ud Feedback; student engagement; Technology; Research.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Aspde, E. J. ad Thope, L. P. Whee Do You Lea? Teetig to Ifo Leaig Space Development, Educause Quarterly, 32(1).
    • Beaumot, C., ODohet, M. and Shannon, L. (2011) Reconceptualising assessment feedback: a key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36(6), 671-687.
    • Black, P. and William, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7-74.
    • Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 72-101.
    • Creanor, L., Trinder, K., Gowan, D. and Howells, C. (2006) Who's learning and how? Researching the learner experience, in Markauskaite, L., Goodyear, P. and Reimann, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Who's learning? Whose technology? 3-6 December, Sydney: Sydney University Press.
    • Duncan, N. (2007) Feed-foad: Ipoig studets use of tutos oets. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(3), 271-283.
    • Gibbs, G. and Simpson, C. Coditios ude hih assesset suppots stu dets learning, Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3-31.
    • Hadle, K., Pie, M. ad Milla, J. Beod d oig tie: iestigatig the oept of student engagement with feedback, Oxford Review of Education, 37(4), 543-560.
    • Hattie, J. A. (1987) Identifying the salient facets of a model student learning: a synthesis of meta-analyses, International Journal of Education Research, 11, 187-212.
    • Hattie, J. ad Tipele, H. The poe of feedback, Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
    • Mory, E. H. (2004) Feedback research revisited, in Jonassen, D.H. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 745-783.
    • Nicol, D.J. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice, Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
    • Parkin, H.J., Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B. and Thorpe, L. (2012) A role for technology i ehaig studets egageet ith feedak, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(8), 963-973.
    • Oppenheim, A.N. (1992) Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. London: Pinter.
    • Orsmond, P.S., Me, S. ad 'eilig, K. Biolog studets utili satio of tutos formative feedback: a qualitative interview study, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 369-386.
    • Poulos, A. ad Maho, M.J. Effetieess of fe edak: the studets pespetie , Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(2),143-154.
    • Pokorny, H. and Pickford, P. (2010) Complexity, cues and relationships: student perceptions of feedback, Active learning in Higher Education, 11(1), 21-30.
    • Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J. and O'Donovan, B. (2010) Feedback all that effort but what is the effect? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 277-289.
    • Rae, A.M. and Cochrane, D.K. (2008) Listening to students: How to make written assessment feedback useful, Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(3), 217-230.
    • Sadler, D.R. (2010) Beyond feedback: developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 535-550.
    • Scott, J., Shields, C., Gardner, J., Hancock, A. and Nutt, A. (2011) Student Engagement with Feedback, Bioscience Education e-Journal, 18. Available at: http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol18/beej-18-5SE.aspx (Accessed: 03 January 2014).
    • Walker, M. (2009) An investigation into written comments on assignments: do students find them usable? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(1), 67-78.
    • Yang, M., and Carless, D. (2013) The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes, Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), pokorny, 285-297.
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article