Feedback practices and transparency in data analysis

Abstract

It has been well documented in the literature that feedback processes, when used timely and with high quality, can enhance students’ learning (Hattie & Timperley, 2007, Van Der Kleij & Lipnevich, 2021). Unfortunately, despite decades of research in feedback and formative assessment processes, we have few empirical studies investigating such feedback processes. We lack knowledge on how students act upon the feedback they receive, and even less studies apply experimental designs. The first article in this issue offers an important exception. Lipnevich et al. (2023) have conducted a study where the research team examined the influence of feedback comments and praise on student motivation and whether it had any impact on their performance. A total of 147 university students wrote an essay draft, received feedback (detailed comments, detailed comments and praise or control) before they revised their essays to address the feedback they had received. The study confirmed previous studies, documenting that those students who received the detailed feedback comments demonstrated higher motivation than students in the control group, but also greater improvement on their academic work. Further, students who received praise reported lower motivation and reduced improvement, compared to students who did not receive praise in addition to detailed comments. The research team discuss the paradoxical effects of praise and recommendations are provided on how to handle praise wisely in higher education. The second article published by Fresko and Levy-Feldman (2023) outlines the topic of teacher evaluation, an area which continues to be controversial across countries globally. In the current study, the researchers collected data from 219 school principals in Israel to investigate the purpose of teachers’ evaluations used. Analysis of the data indicated that teacher evaluations were mainly used for improvement rather than for administrative reasons. Further, it is reported that for teacher evaluation to benefit schools, principals believe adequate training for the task improves the processes. The research team discussthe implications of the findings and how to better support school principals in their role as evaluators. The third article in this issue tackle a controversial issue, with respect to sampling in OECD’s international assessment study, Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Andersson & Sandgren Massih (2023) have used data from PISA 2018 and investigated whether the students’ exclusions from PISA 2018 in Sweden followed the criteria set by the OECD. Since the inception of PISA in 2000, each of the participating countries have had to follow regulations on which students could be excluded (OECD, 2019a, b), and each country must report the exclusion rate of students. As such, some countries have reported higher exclusion rates than others. The authors of the current article have investigated what happened in Sweden when data were collected in 2018, using both qualitative and quantitative data analyses. They conclude that the exclusion rate in Sweden in PISA ASSESSMENT IN EDUCATION: PRINCIPLES, POLICY & PRACTICE 2023, VOL. 30, NO. 1, 1–3 https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2023.2194706