This paper reports from a study of Norwegian upper secondary school students` experiences of feedback in mathematics, programme for general studies. The aim of the study is to examine feedback practice in mathematics from students` perspective and examine how students use feedback to enhance learning. Research question: What characterizes upper secondary school students` experiences with feedback in mathematics?

Feedback is important to enhance students` learning and is a central feature of assessment for learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998a; Wiliam, 2009). Assessment for learning can be defined as the process of seeking information of students` learning that can be used by both students and teachers to enhance further learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998). The quality of feedback is related to the timing of feedback (Shute, 2008) and Wiliam (2001) argue that feedback must be domain specific and specific in what the student should do to improve. Students` understanding of learning goals can function as a prerequisite for learning (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Feedback in itself might not enhance learning, it is also dependent on timing and students` relating to the feedback (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Students` understanding and active use of timely feedback is therefore important to develop further learning.

With the Norwegian PISA results in mathematics as background, Nortvedt and Pettersen (2015) argue that more emphasis should be put on assessment for learning in mathematics to increase students` achievements. Feedback in all stages of a mathematic learning process should provide information about the quality of the work and enhance mathematical understanding and learning (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Hattie & Gan, 2011; Nortvedt & Pettersen, 2015; Nortvedt, Santos & Pinto, 2016). Feedback as mutual dialogues between students and teacher is therefore important for the learning process. Havnes, Smith, Dysthe and Ludvigsen (2012) show that teachers judge their feedback as valuable for their students, while students do not agree in the same extent. Havnes et al. (2012) also show that teachers believe the students use the feedback to a larger extent than the students` report on. Several studies show similar discrepancies between students` and teachers` perceptions of feedback practice (Gamlem & Smith, 2013; Havnes et al., 2012; Jónsson, Smith & Geirsdóttir (2018). With these findings as background, a qualitative study was conducted to examine feedback in mathematics from students` perspective. The study aims to give voice to students` experiences and to develop an understanding of feedback processes, and how to approach these complex learning processes. 

Qualitative data was collected through focus group interviews with three groups of first year students (N = 21) from three different upper secondary schools. Focus group interviews were used in order to get in-depht and manifold information about students` experiences of feedback practice (Gill, Stewart, Treasure & Chadwick, 2008; Kvale & Brinkmann, 2015). The focus group interviews were conducted by the use of an open interview guide, structured in two parts. The first part consisted of statements about feedback related to Hattie and Timperleys` (2007) concepts in their feedback model task level, process level, self-regulation level and self- level, for students to discuss. The second part questioned students` definitions and perceptions of feedback in mathematics, feedback content, quantity and context of feedback, and how students related to feedback and the usefulness of feedback. The interview guide and structure of the focus group interview was piloted, and the informants gave written consent before data collection. Data was collected by using digital recorder and then transcribed by the researchers. The analysis was conducted in several steps. The initial coding made a basis for meaning condensation of all transcripts, and which generated ten categories. These ten categories differed in levels of meaning related to feedback, describing i.e. content in feedback, communication, context for feedback. In order to develop an understanding of the coded material, concept maps were made from the ten categories. Together with quantifying the codes relating to the categories we found patterns, frequency and relations between the codes. This step in the analysis made a basis for five new categories, and together with the concept maps, they made a basis for establishing the findings (Butler-Kisber & Poldma, 2010; Rosas & Kane, 2012).

The findings reveal that students` experiences with feedback in mathematics and how they relate to the feedback, are mediated through the teachers` attitudes and behaviour in the classrooms, and through the quality of the relations between students and teacher. The findings show that feedback is characterized by monologues and teachers passing information on to the students. The students` stories reveal weak interaction between students and teachers related to feedback in learning, and the students do not practice self-assessment and peer-assessment. Teaching in mathematics is managed by the teachers, and driven by the textbook and teaching plans. Feedback is provided by the teachers, but with few opportunities for the students to interact and use the feedback in the classrooms. If feedback is supposed to enhance learning, the teaching must give room for student to use the feedback and engage in feedback dialogues with teachers and students, as well as be engaged in self-assessment and peer-assessment (Black & Wiliam, 1998b; Shute 2008; Wiliam, 2011). The presentation will discuss the findings in relation to these important features of feedback and assessment for learning.

Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assesment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, policy & practice, 5(1),7-74. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment. King’s College London School of Teacher Education, published by GL Assessment (pp. 1-21). Butler-Kisber, L. & Poldma, T. (2010). The Power of Visual Approaches in Qualitative Inquiry: The Use of Collage Making and Concept Mapping in Experiential Research. Journal of Research Practice, 6(2), 1-16. Gamlem, S. & Smith, K. (2013). Student perceptions of classroom feedback. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(2), 150–169. Gill, P., Stewart, K. Treasure, E. & Chadwick, B. (2008). Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Retrived from https://www.nature.com/bdj/journal/v204/n6/full/bdj.2008.192.html Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112. Hattie, J. & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. I R. E. Myer & P. A. Alexander (red.) Handbook of research on learning and instruction. Second edition (s. 290-34). New York: Routledge. Havnes, A., Smith, K., Dysthe, O. & Ludvigsen, K. (2012). Formative assesment and feedback: Making learning visible. Studies in educational evaluation, 38, 21-27. Jónsson, I.R., Smith, K. & Geirsdóttir, G. (2018). Shared language of feedback and assessment. Perception of teachers and students in three Icelandic secondary schools. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 56, 52–58. Kvale, S. & Brinkmann, S. (2015). Det kvalitative forskningsintervju (3.edition.). Oslo: Gyldendal forlag. Nortvedt, G. & Pettersen, A. (2015). Matematikk. I M. Kjærnsli & F. Jensen (Eds.) Stø Kurs. Norske elevers kompetanse i naturfag, matematikk og lesing i PISA. Universitetsforlaget. Nortvedt, G.A., Santos, L. & Pinto, J. (2016). Assessment for learning in Norway and Portugal: the case of primary school mathematics teaching. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23(3), 377–395. Rosas, S.R. & Kane, M. (2012). Quality and rigor of the concept mapping methodology: A pooled study analysis. Evaluation and Program Planning. 35, 236–245. Shute, V. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of educational research, 153-189. Wiliam, D. (2009). Assessment for learning: why, what and how? London: Institute of Education, University of London. Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in educational evaluation, 37, 3–14.