09 SES 01 A, Findings from PISA: Students' Attitudes, Perceptions and Performance
Many studies have shown that feedback is a key determinant for student learning and achievement (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Muijs et al., 2014; among others). Feedback can broadly be defined as information from the surroundings about the learning process that is available to an active learner (Ramaprasad, 1983; Scriven, 1967; Shute, 2008). This information can be offered to the learner by different agents (e.g. teacher, parents, peer, textbook) (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Two international meta-studies have found that feedback is among the single most influential factors in relation to explaining the learning outcome of the individual student (Hattie, 2009; Meyer, 2005).
Despite this enormous body of research on feedback, few studies have explored whether the reception of feedback is equally distributed among all groups of students in the classroom. Furthermore, most of the literature so far did not analyze whether different types of feedback (such as formative vs. summative) are equally distributed within the classroom. Finally, few studies have explored feedback from the perspective of students. Against this background the aim of this paper is to examine how 15 year old students with different background characteristics and mathematic ability receive and perceive feedback in different ways. More specifically, I will use data from the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2012 to examine whether gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic background and demonstrated mathematical ability are related to how much and what type of teacher-student feedback the individual student perceives in the context of mathematics lessons. In order to minimize within school homogeneity in student background characteristics due to, for instance ability sorting, I focus my analyses on the Nordic countries (DK, IS, N, S, FIN).
Drawing on social constructionist theory, I view learning from a student perspective as an active process in interaction with the surroundings (Palincsar, 1998; Vygotsky, 1978). I therefore expect variations between students with different background characteristics in proportion to how much and what types of feedback they perceive (Bernstein, 1975; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990; Frykman, 1998). This standpoint also implies that intended feedback from the teacher is not always equal to the perceived feedback of the individual student. I focus on the feedback that is given by the teacher and perceived by the student. While summative and formative feedback are both components of the concept of feedback (e.g., Scriven, 1967), I distinguish between these two types of feedback when examining how these two types are distributed among students.
The paper will thus be one of the first empirical studies on systematic group differences in the distribution of feedback (Black & Wiliam, 1998).
Bernstein, B. (1975). Class and Pedagogies: Visible and Invisible. Educational Studies, 1(1), 23–41. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1990). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: Sage Publications. Frykman, J. (1998). Ljusnande Framtid!: Skole, Social Mobilitet Och Kulturel Identitet. Lund: Historiska Media. Hattie, J. A. (2009). Visible learning - A Synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routhledge. Hattie, J. A., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. Meyer, H. (2005). Hvad er god undervisning? København: Gyldendal. Muijs, D., Kyriakides, L., van der Werf, G., Creemers, B., Timperley, H., & Earl, L. (2014). State of the art – teacher effectiveness and professional learning. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 231–256. Palincsar, a S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345–375. Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28, 4–13. Scriven, M. (1967). The Methodology of Evaluation. In Perspectives of Curriculum Evaluation (pp. 39–83). Chicago: Rand McNally & Company. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on Formative Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling (second edi). London etc.: Sage Publishers. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Harvard University Press.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.