Cited by 53Student Assessment and FeedbackEducational and Psychological AssessmentsEducational Research and Methods

Students' Interpretation of Formative Assessment Feedback: Three Claims for Why We Know So Little about Something So Important

Leighton, Jacqueline P.·2019·Journal of Educational Measurement

Abstract

Abstract If K‐12 students are to be fully integrated as active participants in their own learning, understanding how they interpret formative assessment feedback is needed. The objective of this article is to advance three claims about why teachers and assessment scholars/specialists may have little understanding of students’ interpretation of formative assessment feedback. The three claims are as follows. First, there is little systematic research of K‐12 students’ interpretations of feedback. Systematic research requires gathering substantive evidence of students’ cognitive and emotional processes using psychological methods and tools. Second, there is an overemphasis on the external assessment process at the expense of uncovering learners’ internal reasoning and emotional processes. This overemphasis may be due to vestiges of behavioral approaches and lack of training in social cognitive methods. Third, there are psychological tools such as the clinical interview, pioneered by Piaget and used by psychologists to “enter the child's mind,” which may be helpful in uncovering students’ interpretation of feedback and associated behavioral responses. If the purpose of formative assessment is to change student learning, and feedback is delivered as a conduit to help with this long‐term change, understanding students’ interpretation of feedback plays a central role in the validity of the process.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jedm.12237

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Students' cognitive and affective responses to feedback play an essential role in their engagement with it and the efficacy of the feedback in influencing student learning or performance.

    “Students' cognitive and affective responses to feedback play an essential role in their engagement with it and the efficacy of the feedback in influencing student learning or performance (Leighton, 2019).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Leighton, J. P.
Affiliations
University of Alberta (CA)
Corresponding author
Leighton, Jacqueline P.
Venue
Journal of Educational Measurement
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-08-23
Volume
56
Issue
4
Pages
793-814
ISSN
  • 0022-0655 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-3984
OpenAlex
W2969964033
Cited by
51
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
16.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Educational Measurement (publishedVersion)
Funders
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC Grant No. 435‐2016‐0114)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational and Psychological Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
Keywords
formative assessment, feedback interpretation, K-12 students, clinical interview, Piaget

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