Instructor Feedback Research

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487

• Key finding: Feedback is among the top 10 influences on achievement with effect size of 0.79
• Application: Not all feedback is equally effective; must answer "Where am I going?", "How am I going?", and "Where to next?"

Hattie, J. (2008). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887332

• Key finding: Meta-analysis of 250+ influences on student achievement ranks feedback highly
• Application: Focus efforts on high-impact strategies; feedback consistently ranks in top tier

Nicol, D. J., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090

• Key finding: Good feedback helps clarify goals, encourages self-assessment, and supports student autonomy
• Application: Design feedback systems that build student independence over time

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

• Key finding: Formative feedback works best when it's non-evaluative, supportive, timely, and specific
• Application: Separate feedback from grading when possible; focus on learning, not judgment

Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354

• Key finding: Students need explicit instruction in how to understand and use feedback
• Application: Teach feedback literacy as a skill; don't assume students know what to do with comments

Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Rowntree, J., & Parker, M. (2017). 'It'd be useful, but I wouldn't use it': barriers to university students' feedback seeking and recipience. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 2026-2041. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1130825

• Key finding: Students often don't engage with feedback due to lack of understanding, motivation, or opportunity
• Application: Build in structured opportunities for students to process and apply feedback

Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.795518

• Key finding: Peer review develops evaluative judgment and deepens learning for both reviewers and recipients
• Application: Use structured peer feedback to supplement instructor feedback and build metacognition

Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 304-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007

• Key finding: Peer feedback effectiveness increases with training and clear criteria
• Application: Provide rubrics and examples; scaffold peer review process

Borup, J., West, R. E., & Thomas, R. (2015). The impact of text versus video communication on instructor feedback in blended courses. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(2), 161-184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9367-8

• Key finding: Video feedback increases social presence and student satisfaction without increasing instructor time
• Application: Try screencasting or audio recordings for holistic feedback

Mathieson, K. (2012). Exploring student perceptions of audiovisual feedback via screencasting in online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 26(3), 143-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2012.689166

• Key finding: Students find audio/video feedback more personal and easier to understand than text alone
• Application: Consider hybrid approach: text for quick notes, audio for complex feedback

Shute, V. J., Hansen, E. G., & Almond, R. G. (2008). You can't fatten a hog by weighing it–Or can you? Evaluating an assessment for learning system called ACED. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18(4), 289-316. https://doi.org/10.3233/IRG-2008-18(4)02

• Key finding: Immediate feedback supports acquisition; delayed feedback supports transfer and retention
• Application: Match feedback timing to learning phase (new skills vs. application/consolidation)

Hattie, J., & Clarke, S. (2018). Visible Learning: Feedback. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429485480

• Key finding: Feedback timing matters, but quality matters more; balance speed with thoughtfulness
• Application: Set realistic turnaround goals; better to give focused, delayed feedback than rushed, comprehensive feedback