Quality pupil feedback by Hill West Primary School

Hill West Research Papers

How can we improve the quality of feedback at our School so that it significantly contributes to all pupilsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; learning and progress? By Nichola Leeson October 2013

Masters in Teaching and Learning, Teaching, Learning, Personalisation and AfL EDU7149 How can we improve the quality of feedback at our School so that it significantly contributes to all pupilsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; learning and progress?

Nichola Leeson S12799692

Masters in Teaching and Learning Teaching, Learning, Personalisation and Assessment for Learning (EDU7149) How can we improve the quality of feedback at our School so that it significantly contributes to all pupilsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; learning and progress?

Page 1 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692 10/1/2013 Tutor: Phil Taylor

Nichola Leeson S12799692 Section One-Development focus and rationale Although educational literature is littered with initiatives that claim to have a positive impact on pupil outcomes, more recently the Sutton Trust has published a report that focuses specifically on the outcomes of pupils entitled to pupil premium funding. This research, developed by Professor Steve Higgins (2011) looked for the most effective ways of improving outcomes for the most economically deprived students in England. It suggested that significant improvements could be made by encouraging students to think about their own learning strategies, getting pupils to learn from each other and, most importantly for this assignment, by providing effective feedback which can “increase pupils’ performance by an extra eight or nine months in a school year for a very low cost.” Feedback has been a key priority at our School since the last OfSTED Inspection in March 2009. When reporting on the overall effectiveness of the school, the report stated: “Teachers mark pupils' work regularly, although the quality of marking varies between teachers and subjects. Although the school has introduced individual targets for writing and numeracy, teachers do not always refer to these targets when they mark pupils' work. Pupils are not involved in the process sufficiently, which means that they are not fully aware of how to improve their work” (OfSTED report 2009). Much has been accomplished in the four years since the last inspection to improve the quality of feedback so that it impacts on pupils’ learning and progress. Our main priority was to develop a consistent approach across school. The Marking Policy (2013) was re-designed, ensuring that the expectations for marking were made explicit to all teaching staff, and promoting the use of consistent symbols. Policy

Page 2 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

documents ensure that practitioners are clear about the schools expectations, defining that: 

Marking should link to learning objectives and success criteria



Three stars and wish should be used to show three things that the pupil has done well and one thing that they need to improve on



Marking should link to the pupil’s personal target. (School Marking Policy, 2013)

More recently the school introduced an “Initial, Response and Practice” (I,R,P) gap task designed to give pupils the opportunity to respond to their feedback, showing that they understand how to make the next steps in their learning. However, a recent book scrutiny revealed that not all teachers are marking to targets and I, R, P tasks are either not being set or where they are set, are not being completed by pupils. The improvements in feedback to date have developed a consistent, whole school approach, but have only gone some way towards improving pupil progress. This assignment is designed to investigate the ways in which our strengths can be built upon and developed so that feedback is an outstanding feature of the school.

Section Two-Critical Review of the Literature It is, at this stage, necessary to come to an understanding of what ‘feedback’ is and to consider the benefits, and the limitations, of its use within the primary classroom. Brookhart (2008) suggests that feedback is an integral part of the formative assessment process within the classroom. Black (2007) continues that feedback provides the information required to adapt the teaching and learning to better meet the needs of the pupil and the teacher. In support, Clarke, commenting on the work of Black and William (1998) asserts that formative assessment involves “providing feedback which leads to pupils recognising their next steps and how to take them.” Page 3 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

(2003:2). However, Yorke (2003) refers to a ‘definitional fuzziness’ due to the lack of clarity between feedback being either a formative or a summative assessment process, due to its wide ranging nature. Yorke (2003) feels that this uncertainty can also confuse the pupils as to whether they need to respond to the feedback given or whether it is part of an overall judgement relating to their performance. Giving some precision to the confusion, Irons (2007:21) referring to the work of Black and William (1999) identifies feedback, within a definition of formative assessment, as being any type of teacher assessment which relates directly to the pupils’ difficulties and contributes to their future learning and progress. This definition of feedback will underpin this assignment.

To improve the contribution that feedback has on learning and progress within school, it is necessary to understand how it can help learning. Brookhart (2008) takes the view that, once mastered, feedback can be powerful in two ways; applying to learning and cognition and helping the pupil understand their learning and what they need to do next. It can also improve the pupils’ motivation by allowing them the feeling of being in control of their own learning. This view is backed up by the Assessment Reform Group (2002) who state: “Teachers should be aware of the impact that comments, marks and grades can have on learners’ confidence and enthusiasm and should be as constructive as possible in the feedback that they give.” (Assessment Reform Group, 2002, Principle 5)

Weedon et al. (2002) add to this, stating that pupils can be affected by the way teachers respond to their work. The nature of the feedback can affect the way that they see themselves as learners, particularly if it focuses on what they have not done well, rather than recognising what they have actually achieved. Four types of pupil response to feedback have been identified by Kluger and DeNisi (1996) who write that feedback can be both beneficial and harmful to the learning and progress of pupils. When the feedback gives clear improvements, the pupil will strive to achieve Page 4 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

the standard, believing that they can succeed. They will give up on achieving the standard due to low self-belief. They will attempt to change the standard to make it easier or more difficult, to achieve, or they may refuse to accept that there is a gap between their work and the standard they need to achieve. The learners’ confidence can be developed by maintaining a balance of feedback which includes successes and suggested improvements.

To sum up, Stefani (1998) states that when it is given in a ‘supportive and constructive way’, oral and written feedback, are crucial for significantly contributing to learning and progress.

Oral feedback, according to the Assessment Reform Group (1999) is both personal and powerful due to its one-to-one nature between the teacher and the pupil. It also provides the pupil with their feedback immediately. It should be positive; celebrating success and achievement whilst providing the pupil with advice to enable them to consolidate their learning and make progress. According to Race et al. (2004) oral feedback can be given when returning work marked with a written comment, or, immediately after collecting work in, before it is marked, whilst it is still fresh in the minds of the pupils. Despite its obvious value in providing pupils with an immediate response to their work, the difficulties have been noted. Weedon et al. (2002:116) are aware of the complexities of managing oral feedback when there is one teacher to many pupils. How then, can it impact on pupils’ learning and progress within the classroom? They suggest that this can be managed through a face-to-face discussion with individual pupils or small groups when they are reaching a ‘critical moment’, maximising the impact on their learning and progress. However, there is little elaboration as to what is meant by a ‘critical moment’. In contrast, Black and William (1998) revealed that the subtleties of oral feedback can often lead to a regression in pupils’ progress. The teachers’ tone of voice, their use of body language, and the language used when giving oral feedback, can all reduce its Page 5 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

impact on the pupils’ learning. In addition, Hargreaves et al. (2001) bring to light the range of ‘approval’ and ‘disapproval’ strategies used when giving oral feedback, which convey a message to the pupil about the success of their work. Signs of approval may involve the teacher smiling, nodding or putting an arm around the pupil whilst disapproval strategies could include clicking fingers, staring or shaking the head. In contrast, Race et al. (2004:119) believe that, together with delivering the message to help progress, it is the teachers’ body language, tone of voice and facial expression that can make the oral feedback ‘memorable’, resulting in a ‘very high learning pay-off’.

Clarke (2003) is an advocate of oral feedback for younger primary school pupils within Reception and Year One, when there is very little writing generated. She believes that this oral feedback tends to be intuitively praise-focused, with the teacher showing the non-verbal approval strategies mentioned earlier. The face-toface element may take place with the teacher sitting with a pupil on a one-to-one; with the pupil coming to show their work to the teacher; or when the teacher is working with a small group of pupils on a particular task. Clarke (2003) indicates that as a result of the verbal feedback, the pupils act on the suggestions made. Although she believes that this is true of younger children within school, is this the case for the older pupils? Later on the use of oral feedback in the focus class within our school will be looked at to see if the findings there mirror Clarke’s research.

The key themes that arise from Literature on oral feedback relate to the teachers’ ability to deliver a message to the pupil that will impact on their learning and progress, whilst maintaining their self-esteem and motivation also the teachers’ ability to manage this successfully with a whole class of pupils.

Page 6 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

Although it has been indicated that oral feedback is a powerful form of feedback there is also the realisation that it becomes unmanageable by the time the pupils are in Year Two due to the increasing amount of work produced. As Clarke (2003) mentions, teachers begin to find other means of giving feedback to their pupils such as marking work away from the pupil. Based on what has been read about the importance of timeliness, we are left wondering whether written feedback, completed away from the pupils, contributes as effectively to learning and progress as oral feedback?

Weedon et al. (2002) argue that pupils often become confused by written feedback as it comes in a variety of forms, such as ticks, marks or comments. Butler (1988) found that feedback involving marks did not lead to an improvement in learning but acted as a distraction. He states that pupils see their marks as a means of directly comparing themselves with others. In support, Dweck’s research (2000) advises that feedback using marks can negatively affect the self-esteem of lower ability pupils and can cause higher achieving pupils to become reluctant to take risks, reducing their potential progress. Irons (2007) shares Swing’s view (2004) that pupils are only interested in their mark or grade and that no use is made of the feedback given. In response, Black (2007) produces a persuasive argument for concentrating on a comments only feedback aiding learning and progress by clearly identifying the next steps in learning. Irons (2007) adds that this written feedback should relate directly to the learning goals so that the pupil will know how to close the gap between their attainment and the learning standard. Developing this further, Haines (2004) suggests that written feedback can be given in two ways; as a ‘feedback sandwich’, revealing key strengths, weaknesses and improvements to be made although Clarke (2003) argues that this would be incredibly time consuming for the teacher and unrealistic for every piece of work, or as an ‘interactive approach’ to feedback with the intention of developing self-assessment and reflection. This approach uses the structure of a feedback sandwich but its delivery is oral, with the teacher asking questions such as: What do you think went well? What could be improved? How Page 7 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

could you make these improvements? This approach would stand in contrast to Irons (2007) view that pupils are not given an opportunity to enter into a discussion about their feedback. Would this ‘interactive approach’ work effectively with primary school pupils, who, Clarke (2003) suggests, respond better to oral feedback?

In conclusion, feedback, as part of a continuous assessment procedure, forms an integral element in the cycle of teaching and learning. However, as it takes up a considerable amount of the teachers’ time, its impact on pupil progress needs to be assured.

There are key themes relating directly to the quality of both oral and written feedback in school so that it significantly contributes to pupils’ learning and progress. Firstly, how the teacher can ensure, through effective classroom management, that oral feedback is given at, as Weedon et al. (2002) describe, a ‘critical moment’. Secondly, the effectiveness of written feedback, containing only comments which highlight successes and suggests improvements, on improving learning and progress by considering whether or how pupils can act upon the suggestions made.

Section 3-Justification of methods and ethical issues In the search for ways to improve feedback so that it significantly contributes to pupils’ learning and progress we must first look towards the literature which indicates that oral feedback is powerful due to its personal and immediate nature, although to be effective, it will be limited to a small number of pupils. Attention should then be turned to our written feedback, focusing on whether it closes the gap between the standard achieved and the standard expected.

Page 8 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

Initially a baseline questionnaire about feedback was set up to collect a sample of views from the pupils as efficiently as possible (see Appendix 1). Although fundamentally it asked open-ended questions, consideration should be given as to whether my pre-conceived ideas of what the answers might be, influenced the choice of questions included. The questionnaire was completed by all of the Year Two pupils simultaneously due to time restrictions. This may have impacted on its reliability as the pupils sometimes asked questions to develop their understanding. By responding, the pupils may have been influenced in some way. There was also the chance that the pupils copied each other’s answers although this was reduced by briefing the pupils thoroughly beforehand, sharing with them the purpose of the questionnaire, and the relevance and importance of their personal views. In spite of the reliability issues, which are safeguarded against as much as possible, a questionnaire enabled a large sample of opinions to be collected at speed, therefore justifying this method.

In addition, it was important to collect a wider range of views within school. Our teachers and pupils often complete register tasks which inform the monitoring work carried out by the Senior Leadership Team. This is an ideal method for collecting the views of all of the pupils as quantifiable data. However, to be completed within a couple of minutes, before the close of registration, the questionnaire needed adapting into a pupil survey (see Appendix 2). The nature of this also raised concerns over reliability as the pupils were be required to vote with a show of hands, possibly being influenced by their peers. Nevertheless, the pupils are familiar with this sort of task and are aware that their personal opinions are valued.

The survey was arranged to succeed the pupils’ questionnaire so that the key themes from the questionnaire could be developed further. Would the key themes have been different if the questionnaire had been completed by a different class or age group? It is possible that the responses of the focus class influenced the Page 9 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

questions on the pupils’ survey. Nonetheless, the survey was warranted as it provided an immediate, whole school response to feedback.

With only six week for research, it was necessary to choose a focus group of pupils within the Year Two class. The pupils chosen were from a range of ability levels who had made less progress than others in the cohort. Was it possible to use quality feedback to increase their learning and progress within six weeks? Writing was their key area for development; consequently, support was given to this group during every writing lesson. Initially, they were given oral feedback on their work and the impact of this was measured and evaluated. This led to changes in practice resulting in both oral feedback and written feedback being implemented at a mid-point mark, using ‘feedback’ and ‘feedforward’ comments (see Appendix 3).

Evidence was collected within their writing books, with further notes being made in a reflective journal. A further deliberation should consider whether, if progress is made, it could be contributed solely to the quality of feedback or whether an increased amount of teacher support could also be a factor.

Section 5-Analysis of evidence and findings Currently within school, our marking policy states that feedback using three stars and a wish should be given, highlighting three successes, linking to the learning objective and success criteria, then giving one improvement (a wish). The pupils are given a gap task to practise their improvement and this becomes a writing target for the subsequent piece of work. It is evident that through both the focus class questionnaire and the whole school survey, that the pupils find their written feedback helpful. 42% of the focus class feel that their writing target is most helpful, followed by three stars and a wish (35%) and the gap task (19%). The results are similar Page 10 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

within the survey with 21% of pupils indicating the value of three stars and a wish stating: “It’s personal to me and helps me know that I’ve done a good job and how to improve.” (Pupil A)

The effectiveness of written feedback is highlighted further through the pupils’ responses to the question-How do you know what you need to work on to get better? Overall it was revealed that 39% found out how to improve through their writing target, 23% through their wish, 20% through a general written comment and 8% through the gap task. Interestingly, 5% of the pupils, predominantly in Year Three and Six, suggested that they learnt the most from their score of level. This is in contrast to Butler’s view (1988) discussed earlier, which suggests that a score or level does not lead to an improvement in learning. However, we may be able to imply that a dialogue has taken place to raise the pupils’ awareness of what they need to improve on to move up a level, particularly relevant to the Year Six pupils who, at the time of the survey, were completing their end of Key Stage Two Standardised Assessment Tests. More concerning, however, was that 11% of the pupils said that they do not get time to read the teachers’ comments and act upon the advice given, with 45% stating that they ‘sometimes’ get the time. This view is backed up by Clarke (2003) and Weedon et al. (2002): “Children are rarely given time to read marking comments…Children are rarely given time to make any improvement on their work because of the teacher’s feeling of pressure to get on with coverage.” (Clarke, S. 2003: 53)

“Time must be made for feedback to be followed up in some way, or it is a waste of time giving it.” (Weedon et al., 2002: 115)

This evidence confirms that the use of gap tasks within school, although potentially effective, is still in its infancy and is an aspect of feedback that requires attention before it can contribute significantly to pupils’ learning and progress. Page 11 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

Clarke (2003:53) reveals that: “Children often cannot understand or read the teachers’ handwriting or comments.” This is substantiated by our pupils’ views as 10% state that they do not understand the teacher’s comments and 47% only understood them sometimes. Pupil responses have included: “Sometimes I don’t understand how to do what you’ve asked.” (Pupil B)

“Sometimes the teacher’s handwriting…not yours Miss R, is strange; some teachers do weird z’s.” (Pupil C)

“If you used ’vertices’ and we didn’t know that language, we’re stuck.” (Pupil D)

“I don’t understand if you write really long, complicated words.” (Pupil E)

In response, Race et al. (2004) state that: “Students should not have to struggle to make sense of our feedback. Whether our messages are congratulatory or critical, it should be easy for students to work out exactly what we are trying to tell them.” (Race, P., Smith, B., Brown, S., 2004: 105)

In order to address this issue we will have to ensure that our comments are childfriendly. As suggested by Haines (2004) it may be necessary to offer the oral, ‘interactive approach’ alongside written feedback to aid understanding or, as indicated by Race et al. (2004) to give oral feedback before work is marked so that pupils’ have had the dialogue and the opportunity to ask questions before receiving and having to act upon written feedback. This correlates with the pupils’ view that 49% would like to receive their feedback both orally and in written form, 21% using oral feedback only, and 30% with solely written feedback. Page 12 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

Initially, the rationale was to consider the impact of oral feedback on the learning and progress on the focus group of six Year Two pupils. Although most of the literature indicates that oral feedback should be given as soon as possible after the task, Weedon et al. (2002) advocate its deployment at a ‘critical moment’ in order to maximise its impact, as discussed earlier. Based on this view, a mid-point feedback was introduced which, completed half-way through a learning activity, could significantly contribute to progress.

A reflective journal was started during our first session with a note made of the oral feedback given and the impact that it had. The findings were two-fold. In three cases, the pupils were orally given one improvement that they needed to make to their work. This had an immediate impact, as Clarke (2003) wrote, but was not sustained beyond the next line of writing. With other focus pupils, oral feedback was given two of three times during the lesson, and, due to its excessiveness, no impact was evident. It may have caused confusion, or the pupils may have just ‘switched off’ from too many messages; too many improvements to try to make. Clearly, oral feedback needed to be given in a more succinct way so that the pupils could remember and act upon the advice. Attempting to combine written and oral methods, ‘feedback’ and ‘feedforward’ stickers were created, using the terms developed by Gibbs (2005). The ‘feedback’ sticker stated: ‘So far you have…’. Initially the pupils were informed of what they had done well in their work and, as this became part of regular classroom practice, the questioning techniques suggested by Haines (2004) were introduced so that a dialogue was taking place between teacher and pupil. Pupils were asked, ‘What do you think went well?’ Their opinions were formalised as written feedback on their sticker.

Page 13 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

The ‘feedforward’ sticker stated: ‘Now you need to…’, identifying the next steps for learning. Again the pupils were given oral feedback to suggest an improvement which was then written down. In subsequent lessons they were asked, ‘What could be improved?’ The oral feedback gave the pupils the information they required to improved, yet the corresponding written feedback acted as a reminder to both the pupil and the teacher as to what was expected as the work progressed. It proved, even within a six weeks, to be effective in significantly contributing to the pupils’ learning and progress, with the children in the focus group making on average two points progress. Also, due to its practical and timely nature, mid-point feedback could be a powerful teaching and learning tool when working with any focus group during a lesson so that all pupils are able to benefit.

Section 6-Evaluation of impact and implications The focus of this assignment was to investigate how we can improve the quality of our feedback so that it significantly contributes to all pupils’ learning and progress. Through research, questionnaires, surveys and by working with a focus group of pupils, it is evident that we can now take simple steps to improve the quality of our feedback in school by: 

Continuing with written feedback involving three stars and a wish, target setting and gap tasks;



Ensuring that written feedback is legible and uses child-friendly language that can be easily understood by all pupils;



Using oral feedback to support the pupils’ understanding of written feedback;



Embedding the use of gap tasks by allowing pupils time to read and act upon the advice;



Developing mid-point feedback using ‘feedback’ and ‘feedforward’ stickers.

Page 14 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

In this way the impact that feedback has on pupils’ learning and progress will be maximised. These findings will be disseminated to colleagues so they are convinced of how changes to marking and feedback can potentially impact on learning and progress (see Appendix 4). We have come a long way on our journey of improving our feedback, introducing new strategies such as gap tasks, and developing consistency. Through my research and findings, our practices can be developed further so that feedback does significantly contribute to the pupils’ learning and progress.

Section 7-Reference list Assessment Reform Group (1999) Available at: webarchive.nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/search/primary/results/nav:772 03 (accessed 1 June 2013)

Assessment Reform Group (2002) Assessment for Learning: Ten Principles. Assessment for Learning. Available at: http://www.qca.org.uk/qca_5067.aspx QCA website.

Black, P. and William, D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning, Assessment in Education, Volume 5, Issue 1

Black, P. and William, D. (1998) Assessment and Classroom Learning, Assessment in Education; Principles, Policy and Practice, Volume 5, Issue 1. Available at: area.fc.ul.pt/en/artigos%20publicados%20internacionais/Assessment%20and%20cla ssroom%20learning.doc (accessed August 2013)

Page 15 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

Black, P. and William, D. (1999) Assessment for Learning: Beyond the Black Box, Cambridge, Assessment Reform Group, University of Cambridge, pamphlet 371.26ASS, available at: www.assessment-reform-group.org.uk/AssessInsides.pdf (accessed September 2004)

Black, P. (2007) Full Marks for Feedback, Making the Grade, Spring 2007

Brookhart, S.M. (2008) How to give effective feedback to your students, USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)

Butler, R. (1988) Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation; the effects of taskinvolving and ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance, British Journal of Educational Psychology, Volume 58, 1-14

Clarke, S. (2003) Enriching Feedback in the Primary Classroom, London: HodderMurray

Dweck, C.S. (2000) Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development, London: Taylor & Francis Johnson, D.W.

Gibbs, G. (2005) Why assessment is changing, in C. Bryan and K. Clegg (eds), Innovative Assessment in Higher Education, London: Routledge, pp11-22

Haines, C. (2004) Assessing Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Written Work: marking essays and reports, London: Routledge Falmer

Hargreaves, E., McCallum, B. and Gipps, C. (2001) Teacher feedback strategies in primary classrooms-new evidence in Askew, S. (ed.) Feedback for Learning, Abingdon: RoutledgeFalmer

Higgins, S. (2011) Smaller classes, uniforms, and primary homework among the least effective ways of boosting school performance; News Release by The Sutton Trust 26 May 2011 Page 16 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

Hill West Primary School (2013) Marking and Presentation Policy

Irons, A. (2007) Enhancing Learning through Formative Assessment and Feedback, London: Taylor & Francis. Available at: http://lib.mylibrary.com?ID=101805 (accessed 1 August 2013)

Kluger, A.N. and DeNisi, A. (1996) The effect of feedback interventions on performance: a historical view, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory, Psychological Bulletin, 119.2: 254-84

Office for Standards in Education (2009). Inspection Report: Hill West Primary School, 16–17 March 2009. London: OfSTED publications.

Race, P., Smith, B. and Brown, S. (2004) 500 Tips on Assessment, London: Taylor & Francis

Stefani, L.A.J. (1998) Assessment in Partnership with Learners, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher in Education, Volume 23, No.4, pp339-350

Swing, R. L. (2004) ‘Understanding the “economies of feedback”: balancing supply and demand’, keynote address presented at Improving Feedback to Students Workshop, June 2004, Glasgow, available at: www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/uploads/documents/postworkshop7reportvised.doc (accessed August 2006).)

Weedon, P., Winter, J., Broadfoot, P. and Weeden, P. (2002) What’s in it for schools? London: Taylor & Francis. Available at: http://lib.mylibrary.com?ID=40406 (accessed 31st July 2013)

Yorke, M. (2003) Formative assessment in higher education; moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic pratice, Higher Education, Vol.45, pp477-501

Page 17 of 18

Nichola Leeson S12799692

Page 18 of 18