The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Connecting teacher and student assessment literacy with self-evaluation and peer feedback
Abstract
Teachers’ feedback literacy is a focus of increasing attention in higher education. It may be framed through intentional design decisions, inter-relational aspects of engagement and pragmatic considerations of enacted curricula. Thus, teachers’ feedback literacy is connected to both the enacted curriculum and students’ relationship to feedback. How these connections take shape in particular approaches to the curriculum, affecting students’ roles in feedback and evaluation is not as well-understood. This paper presents findings from an intervention aimed at developing students’ peer feedback and self-evaluation skills in an undergraduate business course. Peer feedback and self-evaluation are increasingly common modes of engaging students as active participants in feedback and evaluation processes. It is therefore worthwhile to understand the ways in which these processes affect and link teacher and student feedback literacy. Data was analysed from a 14-week course aimed at developing students’ competencies in self-evaluation, peer feedback and teamwork. Results are presented and discussed according to three major areas: how teacher’s feedback on student engagement with feedback served as affective ‘meta’ scaffolding, the trajectory of students’ growth in feedback literate self-evaluation, and the relationship of feedback literacy to trajectory of growth in teamwork competencies. The paper concludes with suggestions for further, crossdisciplinarity research.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“The quality of feedback comments is also shaped by teachers' feedback literacy, quality assurance expectations, and disciplinary norms, which influence what counts as useful, appropriate, and actionable feedback comments in different contexts [7-9].”
From Making AI-Generated Feedback Matter: A Large-Scale Study of Feedback Workflows and Student Enactment (2026) · cites this paper as [8]
Citations
Cites
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Sadler, D. R. (1989) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00117714 · Cited by 4,285
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
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
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538 · Cited by 884
Developing sustainable feedback practices
Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075071003642449 · Cited by 869
Developing evaluative judgement: enabling students to make decisions about the quality of work
Tai, J., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Panadero, E. (2018) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-017-0220-3 · Cited by 810
Developing a learning-centred framework for feedback literacy
Molloy, E., Boud, D., & Henderson, M. (2020) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1667955 · Cited by 555
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- 10.1002/ace.16 · DOI
- 10.1080/0260293990240405 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602938 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602930600679050 · DOI
- Boud D., 2013, Feedback in Higher and Professional Education: Understanding It and Doing It Well
- 10.4324/9781315740621 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/07294360.2019.1684455 · DOI
- 10.1080/13562517.2020.1782372 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/02602938.2021.1925871 · DOI
- 10.1057/978-1-137-56502-0_9 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602938.2019.1665166 · DOI
- 10.1037/14528-034 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00114.x · DOI
- 10.5465/amj.2010.0492 · DOI
- 10.1080/02602931003786559 · DOI · Paper page
- Schön D. A., 1983, The Reflective Practitioner
- 10.1080/02602938.2011.598636 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/014920639402000210 · DOI
- 10.2307/1170598 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Guo, K., Pan, M., Li, Y., & Lai, C. (2024) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2024.100962 · Cited by 173
Making AI-Generated Feedback Matter: A Large-Scale Study of Feedback Workflows and Student Enactment
Alsaiari, O., Baghaei, N., Lodge, J. M., Gaševi'c, D., Winstone, N., & Khosravi, H. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.11625
Metadata
- Authors
- Deneen, C. C., & Hoo, H.-T.
- Affiliations
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Nanyang Technological University (SG)
- Corresponding author
- Deneen, Christopher C.
- Venue
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-09-24
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 214-226
- ISSN
- 0260-2938 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-297X
- OpenAlex
- W3203221625
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 8.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- DR-NTU (Nanyang Technological University) (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 literacy, self-assessment, peer feedback, teacher feedback, student engagement with feedback, teamwork skills, undergraduate business education, curriculum development
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Connecting teacher and student assessment literacy with self-evaluation and peer feedback. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02602938.2021.1967284
- The paper
- Deneen, C. C., & Hoo, H.-T. (2023). Connecting teacher and student assessment literacy with self-evaluation and peer feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1967284