Feedback, particularly at this task

Feedback, particularly at this task level, can be delivered and received in both individual and group situations. When delivered in groups, the feedback messagesmay be confounded by the perceptions of relevance to oneself or to other groupmembers. For example, a student may interpret the feedback as pertaining to himor her or may interpret it as relating to the group as a whole or to other individualsin the group. In these latter two situations, it is likely either to be diluted or to beperceived as irrelevant to the individual student's performance (Nadler, 1979). Theeffectiveness of FT in these situations depends very much on students' commit- ment and involvement in the task and on their notions about whether it relates totheir performance.The effectiveness of marks or written comments has also been investigated.There is considerable evidence that providing written comments (specific FT) is more effective than providing grades (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Crooks, 1988). In one of the early and influential studies, Page (1958) found that feedback in the form of short written comments rather than grades alone significantly improved the test performance of students in 74 classrooms (see also Cardelle & Corno, 1981; Elawar & Corno, 1985; McLaughlin, 1974). R. Butler (1987) demonstrated that grades can increase involvement, but they do not affect performance (relative to a no-FT condition). She also showed (R. Butler, 1988) that feedback through com- ments alone led to learning gains, whereas marks alone or comments accompanied by marks or giving praise did not. She claimed that such results called in question the whole classroom culture of marks, grades, gold stars, merit awards, competi- tion rather than personal improvement. As will become a theme later in this arti- cle, feedback that mixes FS with FT is less effective than FT by itself.