Investigating the Impact of Feedback Instruction: Partnering Preservice Teachers with Middle School Students to Provide Digital, Scaffolded Feedback

Main Article Content

Angela Falter Thomas
Toni Sondergeld

Abstract

Abstract: This article investigates the impact of scaffolded feedback instruction provided through an undergraduate methods course. Because of a desire for preservice teachers to have online teaching experience and due to low performance scores in assessment on the edTPA, a project was created which partnered preservice teachers with middle-grades students. Preservice teachers provided digital feedback, as students worked on a research project, while receiving scaffolded instruction about feedback in their methods course. Our study utilizes a mixed-methods intrinsic case study design. Participants included 82 rural middle school students and 16 preservice teachers from a large public university in the Midwest. As a result of participating in the methods course, preservice teachers’ abilities, confidence, and beliefs about giving feedback improved. Middle-grades students reported feeling positive about receiving feedback and felt it was helpful. Implications for preservice teacher training, middle-grades student learning, and issues related to studying teacher education are discussed.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Thomas, A. F., & Sondergeld, T. (2015). Investigating the Impact of Feedback Instruction: Partnering Preservice Teachers with Middle School Students to Provide Digital, Scaffolded Feedback. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 15(4), 83–109. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/13752
Section
Articles
Author Biographies

Angela Falter Thomas, Bowling Green State Univeristy

Assistant Professor School of Teaching & Learning College of Education & Human Development Bowling Green State Univeristy

Toni Sondergeld, Bowling Green State University

Associate Professor School of Educational Foundations, Leadership and Policy College of Education & Human Development

References

American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (2014). About edTPA. Retrieved from http://edtpa.aacte.org/about-edtpa.

Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design implication for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13, 544-559. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13-4/baxter.pdf.

Beaumont, C., Doherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Conceptualizing assessment feedback: A key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36, 671-687.

Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-experimental design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.

Creswell, J. (2005). Educational research: Planning conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Cruickshank, D. R., Metcalf, K. K., & Bainer Jenkins, D. (2009). The act of teaching (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Falter Thomas, A., & Lenox, J. (2015). Two codes are greater than one: Developing students’ vocabularies with images and visualization. Illinois Reading Council Journal, 43 (1), 15-28.

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2013). Common Core English Language Arts in a PLC at Work, Grades 6-8. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Fullan, M. (2006). Change theory: A force for school improvement. Center for Strategic Education. Retrieved from http://www.michaelfullan.ca/media/13396072630.pdf.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.

Hatziapostolou, T., & Paraskakis, I. (2010). Enhancing the impact of formative feedback on student learning through an online feedback system. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 8, 111-122.

Hawe, E., Dixon, H., & Watson, E. (2008). Oral feedback in the context of written language. Australian Journal of Language & Literacy, 31, 43-58.

Hyland, P. (2000). Learning from feedback in assessment. In P. Hyland & A. Booth (Eds.), The practice of university history teaching (pp. 233-247). Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Mertler, C. A., & Campbell, C. (2005). Measuring teachers’ knowledge and application of classroom assessment concepts: Development of the assessment literacy inventory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (n.d.). Scaffolding. Retrieved from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/learning/lr1scaf.htm.

Parr, J., & Timperley, H. (2010). Feedback to writing, assessment for teaching and learning and student progress. Assessing Writing, 15, 68-85.

Pecheone, R., & Chung, R. (2006) Evidence in teacher education: The performance assessment for California teachers, Journal of Teacher Education. 57, 22–36.

Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144.

Sato, M. (2014). What Is the Underlying Conception of Teaching of the edTPA? Journal of Teacher Education, 65 (5) 421–434.

Sondergeld, T. A. (2014). Closing the gap between STEM teacher classroom assessment expectations and skills. School Science and Mathematics, 114 (4), 151-153.

Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning and Equity. (2014). A performance-based approach to license teacher candidates and support program improvement, Retrieved from https://scale.stanford.edu/teaching/edtpa.

Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning and Equality-SCALE. (2013). edTPA field test: Summary report. Stanford University.

Twenge, J. M. (2013). Teaching generation me. Teaching of Psychology, 40 (1), 66-69.

Yin, R. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publishing.

Zhu, C. (2012). Providing formative feedback to students via emails and feedback strategies based on student metacognition. Reflecting Education, 8, 78-93.