Exploring the Impact of Formative Feedback in Higher Education: A Socio-Empirical Analysis using the Sociological Framework of Latent and Manifest Functions
By Dr Michael Demehin, Course Coordinator for LSST’s DMU accredited courses and Module Lead and Senior Lecturer in Health and Social Sciences, LSST Birmingham
Abstract
Tools and models have been developed to enhance teaching effectiveness in pedagogical sciences. One such model proposed for higher education is formative feedback, which can be given orally, in writing, or in audio/recorded formats. Despite its potential as an academic improvement tool, some scientific results have shown a gap where formative feedback did not lead to commensurate academic success among students. This calls for further scientific investigation into its effectiveness in advancing students’ academic performance in higher education. Addressing this gap, this research adopts the sociological tool of latent and manifest functions, highlighted by functionalist sociologists like Robert King Merton. Merton argues that a social phenomenon’s latent and manifest functions are two sides of the same coin, where one part is intended (manifest) and the other unintended (latent). To achieve the desired academic success, it is crucial to consider both latent and manifest functions of formative feedback. Therefore, this research aims to suggest guidelines for effectively utilising formative feedback in higher education. The study utilises a cross-sectional survey to gather primary quantitative and qualitative data, while secondary data are sourced from reputable links. The results indicate the viability of formative feedback in enhancing academic performance and building learning confidence. Based on these findings, the paper recommends incorporating regular and timely formative feedback as a statutory part of academic activities in higher education.
Keywords: Formative Feedback, Academic Performance, Sociology, Functionalism, Latent and Manifest Functions, Higher Education.
Introduction
Feedback is crucial in guiding learners’ progress towards achieving learning objectives (van der Kleij, 2019). Winstone and Boud (2022) identify two types of feedback: formative and summative. Formative feedback, given during the learning process, enables learners to reflect and improve their understanding of a subject. In contrast, summative feedback is provided at the end of the learning period, serving as an assessment of learning. The importance of formative feedback lies in its ability to inform both learners and teachers about the state of progress in learning (Sarid et al., 2021). Additionally, it serves as an evaluative tool for teachers to gauge teaching effectiveness (Triantafillou et al., 2003). However, the impact of formative feedback can extend beyond offering corrective comments, potentially influencing students’ confidence levels or causing anxiety if not properly managed (Cohen, 1985). Therefore, this research aims to analyse the application of formative feedback through the sociological lens of latent and manifest functions, with specific objectives to assess the impact of timely formative feedback on academic performance and explore its significance in the learning process.
In higher education, intentional and well-timed application of formative feedback is crucial for fostering positive learning outcomes (Shute, 2008; Hattie & Timperly, 2007; Nicol and Dick- Macfarlane, 2006). However, an unclear understanding of its application has clouded the linear relationship between feedback and academic performance (Hattie & Gan, 2011). Feedback can be delivered orally, in writing, or in audio/recorded formats, with most students preferring written or oral feedback over others (Shute, 2008). However, the quality of feedback does not necessarily guarantee quality learning outcomes; implementation is equally important (Harris et al., 2014; Hattie & Gan, 2011). Guiding students on the role of formative feedback is essential, as receiving feedback without acting upon it renders it ineffective (Shute, 2008). Timeliness is a critical factor for formative feedback’s efficacy, with earlier research consistently emphasizing the importance of regular and timely feedback for academic performance (Nicol & Dick-Macfarlane, 2006; Hattie & Timperley, 2007).
Formative feedback is an invaluable tool in higher education, but its successful implementation is contingent upon its timeliness and students’ active engagement with the feedback received. By adopting a sociological perspective, this research aims to shed light on the latent and manifest functions of formative feedback, contributing to a deeper understanding of its impact on academic performance and its significance in the learning process. Emphasizing the role of timely and regular formative feedback as a powerful catalyst for academic improvement, this research seeks to provide actionable insights for educators to optimize the potential benefits of formative feedback in higher education settings.
Making Formative Feedback Effective Through Assessment-Components Submission
Based on the critical role of timing in the effectiveness of formative feedback, certain changes have been introduced to the practice of formative feedback, particularly for lecturers in the higher education and widening participation sector. A method has been devised that encourages students to submit their assessments in segments, presenting a fraction of the entire assessment at a time. This innovative approach aims to enhance the quality and impact of formative feedback in higher education settings. As a visual aid to support this method, the steps of effective formative feedback in higher education have been developed (see Fig. 1). This pictorial representation outlines the essential processes involved in implementing effective formative feedback, providing lecturers with a practical framework to guide their feedback practices and promote students’ learning and development.
Source: Author (2023).
Theoretical Underpinning: Latent and Manifest Function of Formative Feedback
Within functional sociology, various theoretical tools have been proposed to analyze human actions and reactions within society. Robert K. Merton, a distinguished American sociologist, furthered the contributions of the functionalist school by introducing the concept of latent and manifest functions. The underlying premise of these functions is that social actions can lead to both intended and unintended consequences, termed “latent and manifest” functions. Manifest functions represent the expected outcomes of an action, such as formative feedback guiding students towards academic advancement, completion of work, and providing guidance (Winstone & Boud, 2022; Shute, 2008; Nicol and Dick-Macfarlane).
These anticipated consequences of formative feedback align with the functionalist perspective (Ritzer, 2006). However, human interactions between lecturers and students during formative feedback can also yield unintended consequences. Despite the positive intentions, unexpected outcomes may arise, underscoring the significance of recognizing the latent function of formative feedback. For instance, a strict lecturer aiming to assert their position during formative feedback sessions may inadvertently diminish students’ confidence, leading to anxiety. These consequences, the loss of confidence and anxiety experienced by students due to the lecturer’s unplanned actions, represent examples of latent functions. Thus, understanding both latent and manifest functions is essential in comprehending the complexities of social actions and their repercussions. By examining the unintended consequences of formative feedback interactions, educators can adopt more mindful and effective approaches, fostering a supportive learning environment and promoting positive student outcomes.
Methods and Materials
This action research employed a cross-sectional survey methodology which aims to take a snapshot of data from a population at once (Soyombo, 2002). The questionnaire was chosen as the research instrument due to its effectiveness in simultaneously gathering responses from multiple respondents (Creswell, 2009). The purposive sampling method was adopted, allowing the researcher to target relevant participants whose opinions were crucial to introducing change in this action research. The study was conducted among undergraduate students studying Health and Social Sciences at the London School of Science and Technology, Aston Campus. Both closed and open-ended questions were used to collect qualitative and quantitative data. The research received ethical approval from the University of Bolton ethics committee. Statistical Packages for Social Scientists (SPSS) and thematic analysis were employed to analyse this research’s quantitative and qualitative data.
Findings and Discussion
Based on the data generated, 100% of the participants agreed that regular feedback can lead to academic improvement, further emphasizing the importance of formative feedback in student academic development. The quantitative results showed that 33.3% of respondents preferred oral formative feedback, while 66.6% preferred written feedback. Interestingly, none of the students chose the option for audio feedback. Among the students, 44.4% agreed that regular formative feedback had positively impacted their confidence, with an additional 11.1% strongly agreeing that it helped build confidence. On the other hand, 11.1% disagreed, and 22.2% strongly disagreed that regular formative feedback could boost students’ confidence. From the responses, 88.9% of students claimed that their grades improved since receiving timely formative feedback on their drafts before the final submission.
Also, all respondents (100%) agreed that receiving formative feedback early with enough time to implement suggested changes would improve academic grades. The qualitative responses from the students provided further insights into the significance of formative feedback in higher education. The themes that emerged include clarity, easy access, and person-centeredness. Both respondents who preferred oral and written feedback acknowledged that timely and regular formative feedback helps clarify any misunderstandings earlier. Written feedback was considered beneficial for easy access, as students can refer to it as a guide to improve their work. Moreover, the person-centred nature of timely and regular written feedback was appreciated by students. In the second segment, themes identified were improved quality of work and grade improvement. Regular and timely formative feedback was seen as instrumental in enhancing the quality of work, with students believing that it contributes to improved academic grades. Overall, the findings emphasize the vital role of formative feedback in fostering academic development and enhancing learning outcomes in higher education settings.
Test of Hypotheses
The first hypothesis explores formative feedback’s impact on student academic performance in higher education. Two statistical methods, Chi-square and Correlation Statistics, were employed to test this hypothesis. The cross-tabulation of two questions, “Do you submit your assignment for feedback before final submission?” and “Have you noticed any changes in your academic performance since receiving regular instructor’s feedback?”, formed the basis of the test. The Chi-square output yielded a value of .244 with a degree of freedom of 2, indicating no significant relationship between formative feedback and student academic performance. However, the Pearson correlation showed a weak linear relationship between formative feedback and students’ academic performance at a significance level of 0.292.
In the second hypothesis, which investigates the relationship between the timing of feedback and its impact on student’s academic performance, two questions were cross-tabulated: “Have you noticed any changes in your academic performance since receiving regular feedback?” and “Do you receive feedback from your tutor as early as necessary to effect the changes?”. The computed value demonstrated a significant relationship between the timing of feedback and its relevance to students’ academic performance, with a p-value of 0.02, lower than the significance level of 0.05. Based on this result, it can be asserted that there is a significant relationship between early formative feedback and students’ academic performance. The Pearson correlation indicated a moderate linear relationship between early feedback and students’ academic performance, with a value of 0.425. These findings underscore the importance of providing timely formative feedback to enhance students’ academic outcomes in higher education.
Discussions
Research on the relationship between formative feedback and academic performance has yielded contradictory findings (Black & William, 2009; Winstone & Boud, 2022; Patra et al., 2022; Sarid et al., 2021). However, the results from qualitative and quantitative data in this action research align in supporting the positive impact of timely and regular feedback on various aspects of learning. Students highlighted several advantages of receiving timely formative feedback, including enhanced clarity, easy access to guidance, a student-centred approach, improved work quality, grade improvement, boosted confidence, and timely completion of assignments. These findings are consistent with existing studies (Winstone & Boud, 2022; Candel et al., 2020), which also emphasize how early formative feedback contributes to work completion and submission, as well as improving work quality and grades (Winstone & Boud, 2022), and supporting clarity and early work completion (Candel et al., 2020).
Building students’ motivation and confidence in their learning journey is crucial for academic success, as confusion can lead to anxiety and panic. Timely and regular formative feedback plays a vital role in bolstering students’ confidence, as evidenced in the findings of this research. By providing guidance and direction, formative feedback helps students overcome confusion and addresses learning anxiety early on, ultimately fostering a sense of learning confidence (Winstone & Boud, 2022).
Although diverse views have emerged from earlier studies (Winstone & Boud, 2022; Patra et al., 2022; Sarid et al., 2021), the results of this action research consistently support the positive influence of timely and regular formative feedback on different aspects of students’ learning experiences. By acknowledging the significance of formative feedback in enhancing learning outcomes and addressing potential challenges, educators can adopt more effective feedback practices, leading to improved academic performance and increased student confidence.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the findings of this research emphasise the critical role of timely and regular formative feedback in enhancing students’ academic performance, a view supported by existing literature (Winstone & Boud, 2022; Candel et al., 2020). Based on these findings, it is evident that formative feedback may not be effective if provided late or if the feedback points are not adequately implemented by students (Shute, 2008; Nicol & Dick-Macfarlane, 2006; Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Therefore, the research recommends that (i) Regular and timely formative feedback should be incorporated as an integral part of the statutory teaching plan in higher education. (ii) Given the findings of this research and the assertions of Winstone and Boud (2022), timely and regular formative feedback is strongly recommended to mitigate learning risks. (iii) Teachers should be provided with a formal timeline as part of the curriculum framework to ensure the effectiveness of formative feedback since delayed feedback may not benefit students. By implementing these recommendations, educators can create an active learning environment and optimize the impact of formative feedback on students’ academic development. Ensuring timely and regular formative feedback will foster continuous improvement and success in higher education.
References
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 5-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-
Candel, C., Vidal-Abarca, E., Cerdán, R., Lippmann, M., & Narciss, S. (2020). Effects of timing of formative feedback in computer-assisted learning environments. Journal of Assisted Computer Learning, 36, 718–728. doi:10.1111/jcal.12439.
Cohen, V. B. (1985). A reexamination of feedback in computer-based instruction: Implications for instructional design. Educational Technology, 25(1), 33–37.
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Evans, C. (2013). Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120. DOI: 10.3102/0034654312474350.
Gould, J. (2009). Learning Theory and Classroom Practice in the Lifelong Learning Sector.
Exeter, UK: Learning Matters Publishing.
Gould, J., & Roffey-Barentsen, J. (2014). Achieving Your Diploma in Educational and Training (1st edition). London: Sage Publication Limited.
Harris, L. R., Brown, G. T. L., & Harnett, J. A. (2014). Understanding classroom feedback practices: A study of New Zealand student experiences, perceptions, and emotional responses. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26, 107-133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-013-9187-5
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.
Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In P. Alexander, & R. E. Mayer (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249-271). New York: Routledge.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Lam, R. (2015). Convergence and divergence of process and portfolio approaches to SL writing instruction: Issues and implications. RELC Journal, 46(3), 293–308.
Machin, L., Hindmarch, D., Murray, S., & Richardson, T. (Eds.). (2016). A Complete Guide to the Level 5 Diploma in Education and Training (2nd ed.). St. Albans: Critical Publishing.
Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Novak, J. D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners. Science Education, 86(4), 548–571.
Patra, I., Alazemi, A., Al Jamal, D., & Gheisari, A. (2022). The effectiveness of teachers’ written and verbal corrective feedback (CF) during formative assessment (FA) on male
language learners’ academic anxiety (AA), academic performance (AP), and attitude toward learning (ATL). Language Testing in Asia, 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00169-2
Prameswari, S. J., & Budiyanto, C. (2018). The Development of the Effective Learning Environment by Creating an Effective Teaching in the Classroom. Indonesian Journal of Informatics Education, 1(1), 79-86.
Sarid, M., Peled, Y., & Vaknin Nusbaum, V. (2021). The relationship between second language college students’ perceptions of online feedback on draft writing and academic procrastination. Reading and Writing, 34, 1247–1271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153- 189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
Soyombo, O. (2002). Doing Research in Social Science. In Olurode L. and Soyombo O. (Eds.), Sociology for Beginners. Lagos: Johnwest Publication.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London: Heinemann Educational Publishers.
Triantafllou, E., Pomportsis, A., & Demetriadis, S. (2003). The design and the formative evaluation of an adaptive educational system based on cognitive styles. Computers & Education, 41(1), 87–103.
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st-century skills: Learning for life in our times (3rd ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Josse-Bass.
Tyler, R. (1949). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Van der Kleij, F. M., Adie, L. E., & Cumming, J. J. (2017). Using video technology to enable student voice in assessment feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48, 1092-1105. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12536
Van der Kleij, F. M. (2019). Comparison of teacher and student perceptions of formative assessment feedback practices and association with individual student characteristics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 85, 175-189.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.06.010
Winstone, N. E., & Boud, D. (2022). The need to disentangle assessment and feedback in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(3), 656-667. doi:10.1080/03075079.2020.1779687
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017). Supporting learners’ agentic engagement with feedback: A systematic review and a taxonomy of recipience processes. Educational Psychologist, 52, 17-37.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538
Well done on crafting such a relevant and insightful piece!