Search

In order for feedback to effectively facilitate learning and development, it needs to feed-forward from one assignment to the next. Yet, it is not always clear how to determine if feedback is actually feeding forward. This paper, therefore, presents a translation device, using Legitimation Code Theory, and specifically, semantic gravity, to help tutors better understand whether, and to what extent, their feedback is feeding forward. The aim is to help tutors better develop their feedback-giving literacy.

Anonymity has been suggested as a way to mitigate the possible negative effects of interpersonal variables that may arise during the peer review process. However, since anonymity is not always possible, it is important to consider how the level of familiarity between peers may influence the peer review process. This study therefore explores the effect that peer familiarity has on receiving feedback from peers. A qualitative and quantitative analysis of the data, collected via a questionnaire, reveals that the majority of the students knew their peers very or fairly well and felt comfortable and enjoyed working with them. The process was less confrontational, with more honesty and trust, and better communication. The few students who did not know their peers well felt that they could be more objective in their feedback. The authors conclude that the level of peer familiarity provides a different perspective to the peer review process, especially in contexts where anonymity is not possible.

Research has shown that written feedback is important for student learning and development. However, the messages embedded in feedback may lead to students being misled about what they need to learn or how they need to develop. This article reports on a small-scale investigation into the messages embedded in feedback. Legitimation Code Theory was used to first conceptualise the often-hidden purpose of a discipline (English Studies), and concomitantly of feedback within the discipline, and second to analyse actual comments given to first-year students on their assignments. It was found that there is a clear misalignment between the purpose and practice of feedback, thereby suggesting that students are receiving misleading messages about what they need for success within the discipline. This may have implications beyond merely passing the module. A suggestion is made to actively consider, and develop, feedback as a discipline-specific literacy.

Feedback plays an integral role in students' learning and development, as it is often the only personal communication that students have with tutors or lecturers about their own work. Yet, in spite of its integral role in student learning, there is disagreement between how students and tutors or lecturers perceive the pedagogic purpose of feedback. Central to this disagreement is the role that feedback has to play in ensuring that students produce the "right" kinds of knowledge, and become the "right" kinds of knowers within their disciplines. This paper argues that, in order to find common ground between students and tutors or lecturers on what feedback is for, and how to both give and use it effectively, we need to conceptualise disciplinary knowledge and knowers anew. We offer, as a useful starting point, the Specialisation dimension of Legitimation Code Theory as both practical theory and methodological tool for exploring knowledge and knowers in English Studies and Law as two illustrative cases. The paper concludes that this analysis offers lecturers and tutors a fresh understanding of the disciplinary knowledge and knower structures they work within and, relatedly, a clearer view of the work their feedback needs to do within these.