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.

Tutors play an important role in higher education, as they may facilitate learning, promote engagement, and assist with student success. Students also often feel more comfortable seeking assistance from them than from lecturers. Yet, tutors tend to be sidelined in the literature on teaching and learning, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. The paper is framed by an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) approach and seeks to understand how three tutors in an online academic literacy module experienced the shift to online learning. Data, in the form of personal reflections, were collected online and analysed thematically. It was found that the tutors experienced the shift negatively and they raised practical concerns, as well as interpersonal ones. Implications for tutor training are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Belonging is important for student motivation, retention and engagement. However, belonging is difficult to foster in the online environment, and the pandemic necessitating a shift to online learning has meant that many senior students may not feel that they belong at university. Drawing on qualitative data obtained via two online questionnaires, this paper conceptualises the impact of online learning on students' sense of belonging by focusing on the interconnected nature of spatial, academic and social belonging, which serves to foster an overall sense of personal belonging. The paper also considers what the role of academic literacy modules is in this situation, as they are uniquely situated to foster a sense of belonging in students. A model for conceptualising the interconnected nature of belonging is also presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Doctoral training and education tends to focus on how to research and write a thesis, which can take many forms. However, a thesis is not the only valued outcome of a doctorate: the emerging Doctor is important too. Being and becoming a Doctor implies identity work and engaging affective dimensions of researcher development alongside researching and writing a thesis. These are not always explicit in doctoral education, though. Thus, we contend that their role in researcher development needs to be named, described, and understood. In this paper we use Constellations from Legitimation Code Theory to make visible two valued doctoral attributes and dispositions as exemplars. We have used published papers in the field of doctoral studies as data. Within increasingly diverse doctoral student cohorts, it is important to actively foreground the development of valued affective dispositions through doctoral education to enable more candidates to achieve success in their doctorates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]