Comparing student learning experiences of in-text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback: strategies for formative assessment
(2013) In Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(8). p.919-940- Abstract
- This study compares students' experiences of two types of criteria-based assessment: in text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback, in an assessment design combining the two feedback channels. The main aim is to use students' responses to shed light on how feedback strategies for formative assessment can be optimised. Following action research methodology, the study discusses key categories of student responses from three sources: reflective texts, a questionnaire, and interviews. Results show that different functions were attributed to the two feedback channels: in-text commentary to lower-order concerns related to language proficiency, and rubric-articulated feedback to higher-order concerns related to an overview of writing... (More)
- This study compares students' experiences of two types of criteria-based assessment: in text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback, in an assessment design combining the two feedback channels. The main aim is to use students' responses to shed light on how feedback strategies for formative assessment can be optimised. Following action research methodology, the study discusses key categories of student responses from three sources: reflective texts, a questionnaire, and interviews. Results show that different functions were attributed to the two feedback channels: in-text commentary to lower-order concerns related to language proficiency, and rubric-articulated feedback to higher-order concerns related to an overview of writing achievement. We argue that the different functions have the potential of creating a sufficiently balanced assessment design with the possibility of serving both short-term and continuous learning goals. On the other hand, some students found it difficult to navigate between the two feedback channels. The article therefore ends with a 'lessons learned' section where we list possible ways in which the current assessment design can be improved for optimal use of the synergy effects emanating from a combination of in-text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback for formative purposes. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/3404834
- author
- Nordrum, Lene LU ; Evans, Katherine and Gustafsson, Magnus
- publishing date
- 2013
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- criteria-based assessment, feedback, rubric, formative assessment, continuous learning, English for Academic Purposes
- categories
- Higher Education
- in
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
- volume
- 38
- issue
- 8
- pages
- 919 - 940
- publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:84886089647
- ISSN
- 0260-2938
- DOI
- 10.1080/02602938.2012.758229
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- f2735994-c8e8-45b0-b9ed-6ce76a328e0c (old id 3404834)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 10:28:25
- date last changed
- 2022-04-27 22:30:42
@article{f2735994-c8e8-45b0-b9ed-6ce76a328e0c,
abstract = {{This study compares students' experiences of two types of criteria-based assessment: in text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback, in an assessment design combining the two feedback channels. The main aim is to use students' responses to shed light on how feedback strategies for formative assessment can be optimised. Following action research methodology, the study discusses key categories of student responses from three sources: reflective texts, a questionnaire, and interviews. Results show that different functions were attributed to the two feedback channels: in-text commentary to lower-order concerns related to language proficiency, and rubric-articulated feedback to higher-order concerns related to an overview of writing achievement. We argue that the different functions have the potential of creating a sufficiently balanced assessment design with the possibility of serving both short-term and continuous learning goals. On the other hand, some students found it difficult to navigate between the two feedback channels. The article therefore ends with a 'lessons learned' section where we list possible ways in which the current assessment design can be improved for optimal use of the synergy effects emanating from a combination of in-text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback for formative purposes.}},
author = {{Nordrum, Lene and Evans, Katherine and Gustafsson, Magnus}},
issn = {{0260-2938}},
keywords = {{criteria-based assessment; feedback; rubric; formative assessment; continuous learning; English for Academic Purposes}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{8}},
pages = {{919--940}},
publisher = {{Taylor & Francis}},
series = {{Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education}},
title = {{Comparing student learning experiences of in-text commentary and rubric-articulated feedback: strategies for formative assessment}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.758229}},
doi = {{10.1080/02602938.2012.758229}},
volume = {{38}},
year = {{2013}},
}