The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beyond feedback: developing student capability in complex appraisal
Open accessAbstract
Giving students detailed feedback about the strengths and weaknesses of their work, with suggestions for improvement, is becoming common practice in higher education. However, for many students, feedback seems to have little or no impact, despite the considerable time and effort put into its production. With a view to increasing its effectiveness, extensive theoretical and empirical research has been carried out into its structure, timing and other parameters. For students to be able to apply feedback, they need to understand the meaning of the feedback statements. They also need to identify, with near certainty, the particular aspects of their work that need attention. For these to occur, students must possess critical background knowledge. This article sets out the nature of that knowledge and how students can acquire it. They must appropriate for themselves three fundamental concepts – task compliance, quality and criteria – and also develop a cache of relevant tacit knowledge.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This points to an improvement in students ' evaluative expertise over time (Sadler 2010) as they related their evaluations to the evaluations of others; they reflected whether their judgements were appropriate or not, looking for ways to improve future feedback content and wondering what they had missed in making their judgements that others had noticed (Boud et al. 2013).”
From Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills (2018) · cites this paper as Sadler 2010
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Here, he proposed that student capability in ' complex appraisal ' was necessary for learning from feedback and that educators needed to do more to articulate the reasons for the information provided (i.e. quality notions) rather than providing information.”
From Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work (2018) · cites this paper as Sadler 2010
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Sadler also suggested that an additional method for developing this capability was peer review or assessment, which was also taken up by Gielen et al. (2011).”
From Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work (2018) · cites this paper as Sadler 2010
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This will help them develop appropriate evaluative judgement themselves in relation to criteria or standards and make more sense of and take greater control of their own learning (Boud and Soler 2016; Sadler 2010).”
From Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work (2018) · cites this paper as Sadler 2010
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We identified these pedagogies as developing evaluative judgement through the consideration of previous conceptual work which touched on the notion that students need a sense of quality to successfully undertake study and conduct their future lives as graduates (e.g. Sadler 2010; Boud and Falchikov 2007).”
From Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work (2018) · cites this paper as Sadler 2010
In the citing paper
“Sadler suggests that for information to become feedback, it must enable the learner to take action to remedy the gap between actual and desired performance [37].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“Feedback helps students make sense of their learning and compare their performance against a recognized standard. 1-3”
From Medical student perceptions of feedback and feedback behaviors within the context of the “educational alliance.” (2017) · cites this paper as [2]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vygotsky, L. S. (1964) · Bulletin of the Orton Society · doi:10.1007/bf02928399 · Cited by 20,704
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905 · cited 1×
“It is not feasible here to summarise the findings from the four major reviews of feedback carried out by Natriello (1987), Crooks (1988), Black and Wiliam (1998), and Hattie and Timperley (2007), except to note that all dealt predominantly with school-level learning.”
Ambrose, A., Wittgenstein, L., & Anscombe, G. E. M. (1954) · Philosophy and Phenomenological Research · doi:10.2307/2103745 · Cited by 12,289
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152
Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy
Reid, L. A., & Polanyi, M. (1959) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3119338 · Cited by 7,880
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846
Learning to Teach in Higher Education
Ramsden, P., & Ramsden, P. (2003) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203507711 · Cited by 5,148
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Sadler, D. R. (1989) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00117714 · Cited by 4,285
Self-citationThe psychology of meaningful verbal learning.
Ausubel, D. P. (1963) · Cited by 2,568
Learning to Teach in Higher Education
Ramsden, P. (2002) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203413937 · Cited by 2,259
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Bruner , J.S. , Goodnow , J.J. and Austin , G.A. 1956 . A study of thinking , New York : John Wiley .
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354 · Cited by 2,428
“Approaches that emphasise feedback as telling are insufficient because students are often not equipped to decode or act on statements satisfactorily, so key messages remain invisible (Sadler 2010).”
InfluentialHandbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance
(2017) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315697048 · Cited by 1,977
Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education
Evans, C. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654312474350 · Cited by 1,143
From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education.
Nicol, D. (2010) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602931003786559 · Cited by 1,060
Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2013.795518 · Cited by 966
Metadata
- Authors
- Sadler, D. R.
- Affiliations
- Griffith University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Sadler, D. Royce
- ORCID
- Sadler, D. Royce
- Venue
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2010-08
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 535-550
- ISSN
- 0260-2938 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-297X
- OpenAlex
- W2116967411
- Cited by
- 1,138
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 66 · 2025: 60 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 90 · 2022: 82 · 2021: 102 · 2020: 103 · 2019: 82 · 2018: 80 · 2017: 88 · 2016: 77 · 2015: 69 · 2014: 60 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 36
- FWCI
- 162.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Keywords
- feedback effectiveness, student ability, tacit knowledge, task compliance, quality standards, student self-assessment, higher education assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
