Rubrics are often used as tools for criteria-based assessments. Although students indicate that they appreciate comments given as feedback which make reference to the rubric and provided in addition to it, there is little information on how this type of feedback actually differs from in-text comments with respect to focus, level, and function of the feedback. The focus refers to three major questions in evaluating students' understanding of information: Where am I going? How am I going? and Where to next? That is, feedup, feedback, feedforward. The level refers to the level at which feedback is directed. That is, the level of task performance, the level of the process of understanding how to do a task, the regulatory or metacognitive process level, and/or the self or personal level. Finally, the function refers to the type of content of the feedback. For example, feedback can be a question, suggestion, or correction. More information on this issue could better inform the decisions on how to provide written feedback to students on written coursework/assignments. The study described in this article gathered data from almost 1000 feedback instances. The results revealed that about two-thirds of the feedback instances were provided in-text and about one-third were comments which made reference to the rubric and were provided in addition to it. The results show that comments in both modalities are overrepresented by feedback at the task level, but that comments which made reference to the rubric

No abstract

This study explores how engineering academic teachers perceive their practical knowledge on learning and feedback. Academic teachers and education directors of different disciplines in an engineering university were interviewed. Responses were analysed using the matrix method and cross-case analysis. Five different profiles emerged that provided insight into educators' practical knowledge on learning and feedback and the associated relations. Feedback is not only a necessary tool to foster learning but is also intrinsically interlinked to learning. Learning and feedback were observed to be dynamic during the study programme. Findings suggest that learning theories can be useful to label, describe, and interpret practical knowledge on learning and feedback. The study has practical implications for those supporting academic teachers' professional development in higher engineering education (HEE) with respect to providing feedback.

No abstract

In this paper, we describe work in progress, a study of a large database of written university teacher feedback given to Industrial Design students throughout the semester, over several years. This large corpus is captured technically in a database, but conceptually organized into several feedback moments per semester, which will be analyzed using a newly developed framework targeting Industrial Design education at the university level. Essential aspects of this paper focus on the translation of related work in the area of feedback mechanisms for higher education into a tailored framework for feedback in the area of Industrial Design, and the translation of the existing corpus of data into indicators of feedback quality and how feedback is received and further on used by students in their learning process. Outcomes will be used to further investigate how the quality of feedback evolves and to develop better tools for feedback. With this paper we aim at opening the discussion about our intended process and methodology, as well as inspiration for aspects we have missed so far.