Generating dialogue in assessment feedback: exploring the use of interactive cover sheets
Abstract
Theoretical approaches to understanding student engagement with assessment and feedback are increasingly emphasising the importance of dialogue in recognition that learning tacit knowledge is an active, shared process. This paper evaluates an experimental approach to providing feedback which was designed to create a dialogue between tutor and student without additional work for staff. Tutors on an outdoor studies degree attempted to set up a dialogue with students by providing written feedback in response to students’ questions about their work, requested on their assignment cover sheets. Data were collected in the form of their feedback questions, interviews with students and a focus group of staff. The data indicate that the approach encouraged students to think about their writing but that students’ limited understanding of staff expectations and standards limits their ability to initiate a meaningful dialogue with their tutors. More positively, the research suggests that if staff capitalise on and develop existing peer discussion of assessment, it may provide an important foundation for the greater challenge of entering into a dialogue with academic staff.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Coversheets attached to student assignments provide essential information about the student, the module, and the assignment.
“These coversheets, attached to student assignments, provide essential information about the student, the module, and the assignment (Bloxham and Campbell 2010).”
From Addressing student non-compliance in AI use declarations: implications for academic integrity and assessment in higher education (2025) · cites this paper as Bloxham and Campbell 2010
Cites
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846 · see citing works
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Sadler, D. R. (1989) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00117714 · Cited by 4,285 · see citing works
Nicol, D. (2009) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930802255139 · Cited by 272 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
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 · see citing works
“The acquisition of tacit knowledge of feedback processes emerges through observation, imitation, participation and dialogue (Bloxham and Campbell 2010).”
Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design
Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.691462 · Cited by 1,636 · see citing works
Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education
Evans, C. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654312474350 · Cited by 1,143 · see citing works
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538 · Cited by 884 · see citing works
The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes
Yang, M., & Carless, D. (2013) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2012.719154 · Cited by 414 · see citing works
Managing dialogic use of exemplars
Carless, D., & Chan, K. K. H. (2017) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1211246 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
Gonsalves, C. (2025) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2024.2415654 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
“These coversheets, attached to student assignments, provide essential information about the student, the module, and the assignment (Bloxham and Campbell 2010).”
Quality of Feedback in Higher Education: A Review of Literature
Haughney, K., Wakeman, S., & Hart, L. (2020) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci10030060 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback
Misiejuk, K., Wasson, B., & Egelandsdal, K. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106658 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Schillings, M., Roebertsen, H., Savelberg, H., van Dijk, A., & Dolmans, D. (2021) · Higher Education Research & Development · doi:10.1080/07294360.2020.1798889 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
Dialogism in feedback literacies: a critical review
Myers, T., & Buchanan, J. (2025) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2025.2478159 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bloxham, S., & Campbell, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Cumbria (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Bloxham, Sue
- Venue
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2010-04-26
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 291-300
- ISSN
- 0260-2938 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-297X
- OpenAlex
- W2157872959
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 34.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- Insight (University of Cumbria) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Keywords
- assessment feedback, dialogue, student engagement, tutor-student interaction, written feedback, student questions, tacit knowledge, peer discussion, outdoor study, academic writing
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
