A key assumption of established models of school effectiveness and improvement is that factors of the teaching quality significantly affect the development of students’ competencies and attitudes (Kyriakides & Creemers, 2008). In particular, the power of feedback as a component of teaching quality has been stressed (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Lipnevich & Smith, 2018; Seidel & Shavelson, 2007). Drawing on the feedback theory of Hattie and Timperley (2007) three dimensions of feedback quality are distinguished: On the task level feedback informs the learner on their actual state of learning and/or performance. On the process level feedback provides information on the progress students have made toward meeting and gives hints on how to improve. On the self-regulation level feedback encourages students to regulate and evaluate their own learning process. Additionally, Willems and Dreiling (in press) suggested a dialogue related dimension of feedback involving peers as a source of feedback in evaluating students’ performances. Existing studies show that the quality of feedback affects learning outcomes on both cognitive (e.g., achievement) and motivational levels (e.g., intrinsic motivation) (Rakoczy et al., 2008; Wisniewski et al., 2020). The impact of feedback, however, is not necessarily positive which indicates that individual students differ considerably in the ways that they perceive and use the feedback they receive (Wisniewski et al., 2020). In current social constructivist models, the learner is assumed to be an active agent in receiving, perceiving, and processing feedback information (Thurling et al., 2013). Recently, Lipnevich et al. (2016) proposed a student interaction model of feedback that highlights how feedback is received by the learner and how subsequent action on feedback is influenced by the learner’s individual characteristics. Hence, examining students’ perception of feedback and its determinants has been the focus of much recent feedback research (Lipnevich & Lopera-Quendo, 2022; Winstone et al., 2017). 

There is also evidence that points to gender differences in the perception and processing of feedback (Chen et al., 2011; Hoya, 2021). Yet, studies on gender differences in perceptions of feedback are limited, primarily because of the lack of existing instruments that measure multiple dimensions of feedback perception (Lipnevich & Lopera-Quendo, 2022). Against this background, we aim to investigate whether boys and girls differ in their perception of feedback in German language classes. We adopt a multidimensional view on feedback (Strijbos et al., 2021) by differentiating simple and elaborated dimensions of feedback quality that influence how the feedback is perceived and used for further learning. In order to make meaningful comparisons of means across gender groups, measurement invariance of the instrument must be established (Millsap, 2011). Thus, the purpose of the current study is threefold. First, we discuss the validation of an instrument to measure multiple dimensions of perceived feedback quality. Second, we examine the measurement invariance of the feedback perception questionnaire across gender and investigate mean differences in the feedback perception scales between gender groups. Third, we explore whether the assumed relations between gender and feedback perception exist even under control of individual performance as well as the students’ intrinsic learning motivation.

The presented results are based on data of the German study FeeHe (‘Feedback in the context of heterogeneity’). To the best of our knowledge, FeeHe is the first study in which different theoretically and empirically derived dimensions of feedback are systematically measured from the perspective of high school students in German language classes. A repeated-measures design with two measurement points was used to investigate students’ perception of teacher feedback and the interplay between the perceived feedback and the students’ individual characteristics. At the beginning of a school semester (t1) a total of n=810 students (Meanage= 16.69 [SD=.84]; female = 53.8%) attending the 11th and 12th grade in 49 German language courses participated in the questionnaire study. After one school semester (t2) n=696 of the students (Meanage= 17.17 [SD=.90]; female = 55.2%) were surveyed again. To assess the students’ perception of teacher feedback, we developed a new instrument which distinguishes four dimensions of perceived feedback quality: (i) a task-oriented dimension, (ii) a process-oriented dimension, (iii) a self-regulation-oriented dimension (4 items) and (iv) a dialogue-oriented dimension. All dimensions of feedback perception were assessed by four items per dimension. The internal consistencies of the scales are satisfactory to good (t1: .68≤α≤.72; t2: .76≤α≤.80). Student gender data were gathered from teacher interviews at t1. To assess students’ performance the teachers were asked to provide their current grade in German. Grades range from 1 (excellent) to 6 (insufficient/fail). For the analyses reported in this paper, grades were recoded so that higher numbers represent better performance. Students’ intrinsic motivation for German was assessed by a scale consisting of six items, measured at the beginning of the school semester (t1). The internal consistency of the scale was very good (α=.93). All scales were answered on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (totally agree) to 4 (totally disagree). To detect structural validity of the feedback perception scales Confirmatory Factor Analyses were conducted for each measurement point. Measurement invariance and gender differences in the feedback perception were explored by applying Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Subsequently, Longitudinal Structural Equation Modeling was used to investigate how students’ gender, performance and intrinsic learning motivation predict the initial level (t1) and changes in feedback perceptions over time (t2-t1).

The results on the factor structure of individual students' perceptions of feedback quality are in line with previous research and strengthen the distinction of perceived dimensions of feedback quality (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Willems & Dreiling, in press). These results show that students are generally able to distinguish between the four dimensions of feedback quality in their ratings. However, this distinction is not perfect as indicated by the high correlations between the task-oriented and process-oriented dimension (t1: r = .83, t2: r = .84). We argue that this is not merely a measurement issue, but rather reflects a teacher practice of providing concurrent feedback on student achievement and progress. Concerning the second research question, Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed measurement invariance of the identified factor structure across gender groups. Given that measurement invariance was established, the measures of students’ perceptions can be used to compare means of perceived feedback quality between boys and girls. Contrary to our expectations, we could not find any gender-specific mean differences in upper secondary school students’ perceptions of various dimensions of feedback quality. Results from Longitudinal Structural Equation Modeling revealed that initial intrinsic learning motivation and performance are significant predictors of interindividual differences in the initial level and change of feedback perceptions. Overall, our results highlight that differences in perceptions of feedback quality can be explained by students’ individual motivational and cognitive learning characteristics rather than by their gender, and that such interindividual differences in perceptions must be taken into account when examining the effectiveness of feedback.

Chen, Y., Thompson, M.S., Kromrey, J.D., & Chang, G.H. (2011). Relations of student perceptions of teacher oral feedback with teacher expectancies and student self-concept. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79(4), 452–477. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. Hoya, F. (2021). Unterschiede in der Wahrnehmung positiven und negativen Feedbacks von Mädchen und Jungen im Leseunterricht der Grundschule. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 49, 423–441. Kyriakides, L., & Creemers, B.P.M. (2008). Using a multidimensional approach to measure the impact of classroom level factors upon student achievement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19(2), 183–205. Lipnevich, A. A., Berg, D. A. G., & Smith, J. K. (2016). Toward a model of student response to feedback. In G. T. L. Brown & L. R. Harris (Eds.), The handbook of human and social conditions in assessment (pp. 169–185). New York: Routledge. Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (Eds.). (2018). The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lipnevich, A. A., & Lopera-Oquendo, C. (2022). Receptivity to instructional feedback: A validation study in the secondary school context in Singapore. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication. Millsap, R. E. (2011). Statistical approaches to measurement invariance. New York, NY: Routledge. Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A., and Harks, B. (2008). The interplay between student evaluation and instruction. J. Psychol. 216, 111–124 Seidel, T., and Shavelson, R. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: the role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis results. Review of Educational Research, 77, 454–499. Thurlings, M., Vermeulen, M., Bastiaens, T., and Stijnen, S. (2013). Understanding feedback: a learning theory perspective. Educational Research Review, 9, 1–15. Willems, A. S. & Dreiling, K. (in press). Erklären individuelle Motivationsprofile von Schülerinnen und Schülern Unterschiede in ihrer Feedbackwahrnehmung im Deutschunterricht der gymnasialen Oberstufe? Journal for Educational Research Online. Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M. & Rowntree, J. (2017). Supporting Learners’ Agentic Engagement with Feedback: A Systematic Review and a Taxonomy of Recipience Processes. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 17–37. Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 3087.