Studenten ervaren maar beperkt dat ze regie kunnen nemen op hun eigen leerproces. Regie nemen op je leerproces vraagt van studenten dat zij zelfregulerende vaardigheden bezitten. Ontwikkelingsgerichte feedback biedt enorme kansen om de zelfregulatie van studenten te ontwikkelen. De processen die ten grondslag liggen aan feedback en zelfregulatie kennen grote overeenkomsten. Wil feedback bijdragen aan zelfregulatie, dan moet de student een actievere rol krijgen in het feedbackproces. Om het gesignaleerde probleem van te weinig zelfregulatie door studenten en een te weinig actieve rol van studenten in het feedbackproces aan te pakken, zijn in dit project een aantal interventies ingezet gericht op het ontwikkelen van feedbackgeletterdheid bij studenten. De innovatie in dit project bestaat uit een feedbacktraining die wordt uitgevoerd in het propedeusejaar van een hbo opleiding. Met de training leert de student in het feedbackproces vier activiteiten: de student leert (1) de feedback te begrijpen, (2) de feedback te gebruiken, (3) op de feedback te reageren en (4) gericht te vragen naar feedback. Om de invloed van de training te bepalen is de feedbackgeletterdheid en zelfregulatie van studenten gemeten. Deelnemers aan het rondetafelgesprek worden geïnformeerd over de opbrengsten en uitgenodigd kritisch mee te denken om de interventie door te ontwikkelen.
DOCUMENT
This study was conducted in the context of primary teacher education. The primary teacher education program at HU University of Applied Sciences is at the start of a curriculum redesign in which assessment for learning and feedback will be emphasized. We know assessment and feedback can increase student learning and performance. In the last couple of years students as feedback receivers are placed in the centre of the feedback process. When students actively take up feedback their engagement in feedback will increase. However, some feedback situations work well for them and some don’t. In this study we try to grasp both situations and figure out which factors of the feedback situation did work or did not. We focused on two processes during the interviews and the coding. The first process was about the feedback situation, which characteristics of the feedback context, the receiver and the sender were at hand, and second what did students do with the feedback, did they try to understand and use the feedback, react to or ask for new feedback. The aim of this study is to provide feedback situations that work for our students and use them as elements in the redesign of the curriculum.
DOCUMENT
Dit artikel beschrijft een actieonderzoek waarin onderzocht is of gerichte feedbacktraining en –begeleiding aan basisschoolleerkrachten leidt tot professionalisering ten aanzien van het geven van passende feedback welke aansluit op de leer- en ontwikkelbehoeften van leerlingen. Directe aanleiding voor dit onderzoek was de veranderde onderwijsvisie waarbij geboden onderwijs en onderwijsorganisatie, gerelateerd moest worden aan het ontwikkelniveau van leerlingen. Leerkrachten hadden moeite met de rolomschakeling van kennisoverdrager naar begeleider en bewaker van leerprocessen. Om dit te ondersteunen is middels mindmapping, observaties en topicinterviews een beginsituatie bepaald waarop training en vervolgonderzoek kon aansluiten. Betrokken leerkrachten leerden door stimulated-recall interviews van het eigen feedback-handelen. De feedbackontwikkelingen zijn met behulp van een observatiemodel gemeten en in kaart gebracht. Afsluitend is het onderzoek geëvalueerd middels een vragenlijst. De resultaten van dit onderzoek wijzen uit dat de training en begeleiding positief heeft bijgedragen aan gewenste professionalisering in feedback. Verdere verdieping is echter nog gewenst. In de conclusie en discussie wordt hierop dieper ingegaan. In de aanbevelingen worden dan ook suggesties gedaan voor vervolgonderzoek en –interventies.
MULTIFILE
De Hogeschool Utrecht heeft een experiment uitgevoerd om het curriculum van de Pabo te flexibiliseren, zodat het beter aansluit op de leerbehoeften van studenten. Dit project richtte zich op het verbeteren van zelfregulatie door middel van ontwikkelingsgerichte feedback. In twee nieuw ontworpen cursussen werd programmatisch toetsen toegepast, waarbij feedback centraal stond dat werd vastgelegd in het digitale portfolio Scorion. Studenten verzamelden bewijsmateriaal in dit systeem, waarop verschillende feedbackgevers feedback gaven. Daarnaast werden studenten in kleinere leerteams begeleid en getraind in feedbackgeletterdheid, wat hen hielp om feedback beter te begrijpen, te gebruiken en erop te reageren. De resultaten van het project toonden aan dat het mogelijk is om onderwijs en toetsing zodanig te ontwerpen dat studenten meer regie krijgen over hun leerproces. Het project biedt een solide basis voor verdere ontwikkeling en verbetering van het onderwijsprogramma.
MULTIFILE
Studenten ervaren maar beperkt dat ze regie kunnen nemen op hun eigen leerproces. Regie nemen op je leerproces vraagt van studenten dat zij zelfregulerende vaardigheden bezitten. Ontwikkelingsgerichte feedback biedt enorme kansen om de zelfregulatie van studenten te ontwikkelen. De processen die ten grondslag liggen aan feedback en zelfregulatie kennen grote overeenkomsten. Wil feedback bijdragen aan zelfregulatie, dan moet de student een actievere rol krijgen in het feedbackproces. Om het gesignaleerde probleem van te weinig zelfregulatie door studenten en een te weinig actieve rol van studenten in het feedbackproces aan te pakken, zijn in dit project een aantal interventies ingezet gericht op het ontwikkelen van feedbackgeletterdheid bij studenten. De innovatie in dit project bestaat uit een feedbacktraining die wordt uitgevoerd in het propedeusejaar van een hbo opleiding. Met de training leert de student in het feedbackproces vier activiteiten: de student leert (1) de feedback te begrijpen, (2) de feedback te gebruiken, (3) op de feedback te reageren en (4) gericht te vragen naar feedback. Om de invloed van de training te bepalen is de feedbackgeletterdheid en zelfregulatie van studenten gemeten.
DOCUMENT
Background: The importance of clarifying goals and providing process feedback for student learning has been widely acknowledged. From a Self-Determination Theory perspective, it is suggested that motivational and learning gains will be obtained because in well-structured learning environments, when goals and process feedback are provided, students will feel more effective (need for competence), more in charge over their own learning (need for autonomy) and experience a more positive classroom atmosphere (need for relatedness). Yet, in spite of the growing theoretical interest in goal clarification and process feedback in the context of physical education (PE), little experimental research is available about this topic. Purpose: The present study quasi-experimentally investigated whether the presence of goal clarification and process feedback positively affects students’ need satisfaction and frustration. Method: Twenty classes from five schools with 492 seventh grade PE students participated in this quasi-experimental study. Within each school, four classes were randomly assigned to one of the four experimental conditions (n = 121, n = 117, n = 126 and n = 128) in a 2 × 2 factorial design, in which goal clarification (absence vs. presence) and process feedback (absence vs. presence) were experimentally manipulated. The experimental lesson consisted of a PE lesson on handstand (a relatively new skill for seventh grade students), taught by one and the same teacher who went to the school of the students to teach the lesson. Depending on the experimental condition, the teacher either started the lesson explaining the goals, or refrained from explaining the goals. Throughout the lesson the teacher either provided process feedback, or refrained from providing process feedback. All other instructions were similar across conditions, with videos of exercises of differential levels of difficulty provided to the students. All experimental lessons were observed by a research-assistant to discern whether manipulations were provided according to a condition-specific script. One week prior to participating in the experimental lesson, data on students’ need-based experiences (i.e. quantitatively) were gathered. Directly after students’ participation in the experimental lesson, data on students’ perceptions of goal clarification and process feedback, need-based experiences (i.e. quantitatively) and experiences in general (i.e. qualitatively) were gathered. Results and discussion: The questionnaire data and observations revealed that manipulations were provided according to the lesson-scripts. Rejecting our hypothesis, quantitative analyses indicated no differences in need satisfaction across conditions, as students were equally satisfied in their need for competence, autonomy and relatedness regardless of whether the teacher provided goal clarification and process feedback, only goal clarification, only process feedback or none. Similar results were found for need frustration. Qualitative analyses indicated that, in all four conditions, aspects of the experimental lesson made students feel more effective, more in charge over their own learning and experience a more positive classroom atmosphere. Our results suggest that under certain conditions, lessons can be perceived as highly need-satisfying by students, even if the teacher does not verbally and explicitly clarify the goals and/ or provides process feedback. Perhaps, students were able to self-generate goals and feedback based on the instructional videos.
DOCUMENT
Feedback is one of the most powerful tools teachers can use to enhance student learning. In 2006, the Dutch Inspectorate of Education concluded from classroom observations that it is difficult for Dutch teachers to give their students good feedback in order to stimulate students' learning process and developmental progress. Similar problems were revealed in other school levels and countries, for example in secondary education and in Finland. Giving feedback during active learning may be even more troublesome for teachers. During active learning, students are working in small groups on different learning goals and undertake different learning activities at the same time. They need to achieve task-related goals as well as to develop the meta-cognitive knowledge and skills that are needed for active learning. Yet, teachers often seem unable to provide the feedback that is needed and they do not know how to support the development of meta-cognitive knowledge and skills.Therefore, this research project focused on ways to improve primary school teachers' feedback giving practices during active learning. The central research question is: How can primary school teachers learn to give optimal feedback to pupils during active learning? To answer this question, five studies have been conducted. In the first study, knowledge regarding teachers' feedback practices was gathered. A category system was developed based on the literature and empirical data. A total of 1465 teacher-student interactions of 32 teachers who practiced active learning in the domain of environmental studies in the sixth, seventh or eighth grade of 13 Dutch primary schools were videotaped and assessed using this system. Results showed that about half of the teacher-student interactions contained feedback. This feedback was usually focused on the tasks that were being performed by the students and on the ways in which these tasks were processed. Only 5% of the feedback was explicitly related to a learning goal. In their feedback, the teachers were directing (rather than facilitating) the learning processes. During active learning, however, feedback on meta-cognition and social learning is important. Feedback should be explicitly related to learning goals. In practice, these kinds of feedback appear to be scarce. In the second study, the problems these 32 primary school teachers perceive and the beliefs they hold regarding the provision of feedback were investigated. A writing task and an interview were conducted. It appeared that teachers believed that conditional teacher skills, especially time management, hindered them most from giving good feedback. The most widely held belief was that 'feedback should be positive'. Teachers also believed that it is important to adopt a facilitative way of giving feedback, but they found this difficult to implement. Only some teachers believed goal-directedness and a focus on student meta-cognition were important during active learning and teachers did not perceive problems regarding these aspects. In the third study, a professional development program (PDP) was developed, implemented and evaluated. The goals and content of the PDP were based on a review of the literature regarding feedback and active learning and on the results of the preceding studies. The design of the PDP was based on the extant literature regarding the features which are considered to be important for PDPs, including structural features, goal setting and characteristics of the professional development activities that are part of the program. Effects of this PDP on 16 primary schoolteachers' knowledge, beliefs, perceived problems and classroom behavior were examined via observations, a writing task and a questionnaire prior and twice after the program was implemented. Results showed that several aspects of feedback during active learning were improved, both in the short and in the long term. For example, teachers learned to believe that feedback must be goal-directed and that learning goals need to be communicated to students. In the classrooms, teachers related their feedback more often explicitly to the learning goals. In the fourth study, the extent to which teachers attributed the success of the PDP to each of the purposefully implemented features of the PDP was examined. The 16 teachers that participated in the PDP completed a questionnaire and four focus group interviews were conducted. Results indicated that teachers value most features quite highly; all features contributed to teachers' professional development according to the teachers themselves. The qualitative data was used to illustrate and specify the theoretical knowledge regarding the features that appeared to be effective in PDP's. Finally, in the fifth study, the learning process of two of the participating teachers was described in detail. Written reflections, as well as videotaped reflections during the video interaction training meetings were analyzed and related to the effects of the PDP on both teachers' knowledge, beliefs, perceived problems and classroom behavior during te course of the PDP. By relating the learning processes of these two teachers to the literature regarding professional development, we aimed for a rich understanding of the impact of the PDP on teachers' professional development.
DOCUMENT
Three training conditions were compared in a task of learning locations of cities on a map: one in which participants could avoid errors by searching for the name of the correct city, and two others in which either immediate feedback after each response or delayed feedback after all responses had been made was given. Learners who received feedback only after placing all the cities on the map performed more poorly overall during training but outperformed the other two groups in both immediate and delayed tests. This advantage is interpreted as evidence of differential development of relational knowledge and application of cognitive effort across training conditions.
DOCUMENT
In response to dissatisfaction with testing cultures in higher education, programmatic assessment has been introduced as an alternative approach. Programmatic ssessment involves the longitudinal collection of data points about student learning, aimed at continuous monitoring and feedback. High-stakes decisions are based on a multitude of data points, involving aggregation, saturation and group-decision making. Evidence about the value of programmatic assessment is emerging in health sciences education. However, research also shows that students find it difficult to take an active role in the assessment process and seek feedback. Lower performing students are underrepresented in research on programmatic assessment, which until now mainly focuses on health sciences education. This study therefore explored low and high performing students’ experiences with learning and decision-making in programmatic assessment in relation to their feedback-seeking behaviour in a Communication Sciences program. In total, 55 students filled out a questionnaire about their perceptions of programmatic assessment, their feedback-seeking behaviour and learning performance. Low-performing and high-performing students were selected and interviewed. Several designable elements of programmatic assessment were distinguished that promote or hinder students’ feedback-seeking behaviour, learning and uptake of feedback.
LINK
This study investigated to what degree lesson-to-lesson variability in teachers' goal clarification and process feedback explains variability in secondary students’ motivational correlates. Students (N=570, 24 classes) completed questionnaires at six occasions. Multilevel regression analyses showed that relations between perceived process feedback and experienced need satisfaction (i.e., competence, autonomy and relatedness) were conditional on perceived goal clarification. No such interaction effects between process feedback and goal clarification were found for need frustration (i.e., experiencing failure, feeling pushed to achieve goals, feeling rejected). In general, when students perceived more process feedback or goal clarification, students experienced more competence, autonomy and relatedness satisfaction. Yet, when perceiving very high levels of process feedback, additional benefits of goal clarification were no longer present (and vice versa). In lessons in which students perceived goals to be less clear, they experienced more need frustration. No associations were found between process feedback and need frustration.
DOCUMENT
