Evaluating the best practice and impact of written feedback in

A-level Mathematics

Sachin Aggarwal

1
Contents
1 Introduction 3
1.1 Formative Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Written Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Issues Surrounding Feedback in A-level Mathematics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2 Written Feedback in A-level Mathematics 6

2.1 Theoretical Models of Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.1 Hattie and Timperley (2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.2 Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 Self-assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Self-esteem and Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3 Conclusion 10

4 Appendices 11
4.1 Reflection - Presentation and Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2 Reflection - Algebra and Problem-Solving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3 Reflection - Problem-Solving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

5 References 13

2
1 Introduction

1.1 Formative Assessment

Teaching, with the intention of raising the standards of students’ learning, is an incredibly
complex and demanding task. Black and Wiliam (1998) describe the classroom as a black box,
with certain inputs from outside, and outputs that follow. Given a large and varied set of
inputs that are usually out of their control, teachers are expected to work within the black box
to maximise the outputs, such as more knowledgeable pupils and better test results. Formative
assessment is but one aspect of teaching, albeit an aspect that encompasses much of what
happens in the classroom and is ‘at the heart of effective teaching’ (Black and Wiliam, 1998,
p.140).
As described by Sadler (1989, p.120), formative assessment is ‘concerned with how judgments
about the quality of student responses...can be used to shape and improve the student’s compe-
tence’. Throughout the teaching and learning process, teachers gather large amounts of evidence
(student responses) in many forms regarding the level of student understanding and competence
at any given time. This ‘becomes formative assessment when the evidence is actually used to
adapt the teaching to meet student needs’ (Black and Wiliam, 1998, p.140). Both Sadler and
Black and Wiliam concisely convey the importance of formative assessment; the primary role of
the teacher is to improve students’ competence and help their learning progress, and given the
time and resource constraints faced by teachers and schools, it is imperative that this is done as
efficiently as possible. Good formative assessment is primarily what helps teachers to do this,
so that they are continually and reliably informed as to how to best adapt their teaching to
adequately meet their students’ needs.
It can be argued that, within the process of teaching and learning mathematics, formative
assessment plays an even more crucial role. The learning of mathematical concepts follows an
extensively hierarchical sequence - ‘we cannot form any particular concept until we have formed
all the subsidiary ones upon which it is depends’ (Lawton, 2006). It is therefore even more
important that teachers formatively assess their students regularly, so that they are aware of
the students’ level of understanding of each concept. This can help prevent teachers wasting
time trying to teach concepts that are unlikely to be properly accessed by students because they
do not possess the necessary mathematical foundations.
To use an analogy from Mark McCourt (former Director of NCETM), ‘there is no point in trying
to lay another brick unless the brick underneath is secure’ (Mark McCourt researchED Maths
and Science, 2016). From my experience of teaching students across a range of ages and ability
levels, this analogy has rung true on many occasions; attempting to teach students more complex
mathematical concepts when they have not yet grasped the basics has often been a waste of time.
When talking about the widely lauded mastery approach to teaching mathematics, popular in
East Asian education, McCourt sums mastery up as ‘just formative assessment and correctives’,
further highlighting the integral role played by formative assessment.

1.2 Written Feedback

Feedback is a critical aspect of teaching that comes under the umbrella of formative assessment.
It has been summarised by Winne and Butler (1994, cited in Hattie and Timperley, 2007, p.82)
as

3
 information with which a learner can confirm, add to, overwrite, tune, or restruc-
ture information in memory, whether that information is domain knowledge, meta-
cognitive knowledge, beliefs about self and tasks, or cognitive tactics and strategies
It is clear that feedback is a broad, overarching term in itself, covering external factors such
as the style and nature of comments given by a teacher regarding knowledge or processes,
and internal factors such as the student’s interpretation of the comments given and how this
subsequently impacts their understanding and learning.
However, the overall premise of feedback can be given as follows: ‘Feedback is information about
the gap between the actual level and the reference level...which is used to alter the gap in some
way’ (Ramaprasad, 1983, cited in Sadler, 1989, p.120). It is a dialogic process between a teacher
and a student, with the principal aim of the teacher being diagnosis and remediation, while the
aim of the student is to recognise high quality and modify and improve unsatisfactory aspects
of their work (Sadler, 1989).
Hattie and Timperley (2007, p.81) describe feedback as ‘one of the most powerful influences
on learning and achievement, but this impact can be either positive or negative.’ It is for this
reason that feedback has been the subject of so much academic study, and due to the impact it
can have, it is vital that the best practice of giving feedback is ascertained and that teachers use
it judiciously to maximise its positive impact on students. Studies have shown that ‘on average
the provision of high-quality feedback led to an improvement of eight additional months progress
over the course of a year’ (Elliot et al., 2016, p.6).
There are numerous types of feedback, such as verbal feedback or feedback as part of peer-
assessment, but it is written feedback provided by the teacher that will be the main focus of
this essay. This form of feedback is often the centre of much academic discussion regarding
its efficacy. This is due to some of its inherent limitations, such as generally not being ‘in-
the-moment’ (compared to, say, verbal feedback), and having the potential to adversely affect
the student’s self-esteem and confidence. Written feedback is usually the result of marking
work, so we must also consider the arduousness of an increase in teacher workload as a result
of having to mark work and give (possibly quite detailed) written feedback. As such it is
important to evaluate whether the benefits to the student outweigh the time and effort cost to
the teacher.

1.3 Issues Surrounding Feedback in A-level Mathematics

There is a significant jump in difficulty from GCSE to A-level Mathematics, and it has even
been suggested that this gap is bigger in mathematics than in other subjects (Wiliam et al.,
1999). It is at A-level that many students, including even those who were high attainers at
GCSE, are ‘found out’ by the rigour and thoroughness of the course. As discussed in Section
1.1, this is often due to students not having adequately formed the prerequisite mathematical
concepts, leading to them struggling to access the challenging concepts at A-level - they are
effectively trying to ‘lay bricks’ on a non-existent (or at best, insecure) foundation.
Because of this, formative assessment is pivotal to helping students to progress, and in particular,
the impacts (both positive and negative) of written feedback are exacerbated. For example, due
to the depth and breadth of understanding students are expected to reach at A-level, it can
be very important for teachers to identify students’ misconceptions and faulty understanding
early, before these misconceptions manifest themselves as a ‘harmful bug’ that hinders students

4
attaining further understanding. To do this, however, would almost certainly require teachers
to mark students’ work frequently, adding to an already daunting workload.
Further to this is the issue of students’ motivation and self-esteem. For many students, who have
been used to quickly grasping mathematical concepts at the necessary level for that particular
juncture in their school life (which may, in fact, only be a superficial understanding), it can
come as quite a shock that they are now struggling with much of the course and are constantly
receiving critical feedback. This can be quite detrimental to students’ confidence and their
mindset going forward. This is supported by Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, who state that there
is ‘evidence that teachers can have a positive or negative effect on motivation and self-esteem’
(2006, p.212). However, as argued by Rakoczy et al.
In diagnostic situations in school, it would not be reasonable to provide feedback
which makes all students feel competent regardless of their actual performance be-
cause curricular goals need to be reached. (2013, p.65)
The practice of giving feedback is therefore a potential minefield for teachers, and implementing
effective feedback strategies requires knowledge and skill.
The factors detailed above have been evident throughout my own experience of teaching A-level
students and through speaking to experienced A-level teachers. I have witnessed both positive
and negative impacts of my feedback to A-level students, and have discussed with other teachers
at length the factors that may have caused these results. As such, the focus of this essay will
be on the process of giving written feedback to A-level students.
It is also important to note that A-level students are generally aged 16 and over, and are
usually preparing for entry to higher education or employment once they leave school. It is
written in the NCETM guidance on marking and feedback for secondary mathematics that
‘As students progress through secondary school, they should become increasingly responsible
for their learning’ (2016, p.2). A-level can be seen as ‘bridging the gap’ for students between
school and further education/employment, and as teachers, we should be encouraging students
to become self-regulated learners. One of way of doing this is through the written feedback
we give, and how we expect students to respond. In this essay, I will be exploring different
theoretical models of feedback, such as Hattie and Timperley (2007) and Nicol and Macfarlane-
Dick (2006). This takes into account feedback models in both school and higher education,
which I feel gives the most appropriate overview on how to deal with written feedback at A-
level. Throughout the evaluation of the models, I will look at how the factors discussed above,
such as addressing misconceptions and praise, amongst others, are dealt with.

5
2 Written Feedback in A-level Mathematics

2.1 Theoretical Models of Feedback

2.1.1 Hattie and Timperley (2007)

They claim (p.86) that ‘the main purpose of feedback is to reduce discrepancies between current
understandings and performance and a goal.’ Their model postulates that effective feedback
must answer three major questions: ‘What are the goals?’, ‘What progress is being made toward
the goal?’, and ‘What activities need to be undertaken to make better progress?’.
Firstly, feedback should set students clear learning goals, giving them information regarding
the level of performance that is to be attained so they can act accordingly. As clearly-defined
goals are attained, teachers and students can set further goals that are appropriately challenging,
keeping learning ongoing. Goals without clarity, where students are unsure if they are successful,
are often not specific enough to enhance learning.
Due to the objective nature of mathematics, I believe that setting well-defined goals can be
routinely achieved, especially when high performance is modelled to the students alongside.
When given well-defined goals, it is usually quite clear to the student whether they have been
successful or not as there is generally a ‘right or wrong’ answer within mathematics. Also, in
A-level, although the topics often have a lot of depth and there are lot of cross-topic links that
need to be understood, there is a clear logical progression through a concept which makes it
easier to define goals, as it is important for students to achieve each step in the process.
Secondly, it is important for feedback to provide information to the student regarding the level
of their performance in relation to the desired goal. This can involve talking about outright
successes and failures on a task, evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of a piece of work,
and identifying areas of improvement on previous work. As mentioned previously, topics in
A-level Mathematics are often deep and complex, and as such can be daunting to a student if
they feel like they have made little/no progress or have a long way to go. I believe that it is
therefore important for students to be continually made aware of the level they are at, where
they are in relation to the end-goal, and progress that they have made. Rakoczy et al. (2013)
argue that this ‘process-oriented’ feedback enhances a learner’s motivation and engagement,
particularly for students whose goal is to understand content as thoroughly as possible (high
mastery approach).
Thirdly, the feedback given should endeavour to provide explicit methods and activities to
students on how to progress and where to go next. This can include
enhanced challenges, more self-regulation over the learning process, greater fluency
and automaticity, more strategies and processes to work on the tasks, deeper under-
standing, and more information about what is and what is not understood. (p.90)
While it is sometimes necessary to give students more information or tasks in the feedback, it
should be aimed to be done with more specificity with regard to some of the things listed above,
in order to make future tasks and learning more meaningful to students rather than simply
‘more’ tasks.

6
2.1.2 Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006)

The model proposed by Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick is aimed at higher education, in which the
onus of feedback is on empowering students as self-regulated learners. Pintrich and Zusho
(2002, cited in Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, p.202) define self-regulated learning as ‘an active
constructive process whereby learners set goals for their learning and monitor, regulate, and
control their cognition, motivation, and behaviour’. This idea resonates with A-level, as this
is a time when the majority of this work is done independently by students and relies on
them being self-regulated learners. The model hinges on seven principles of effective feedback
practice:
1. Clarifying good performance
2. Facilitating the development of self-assessment
3. Delivering high-quality information to students about their learning
4. Encouraging teacher and peer dialogue
5. Encouraging positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem
6. Providing opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance
7. Providing information to guide teaching
Principles (1), (3) and (6) can be seen to correspond to the three major questions in the Hattie
and Timperley model, but with more emphasis on self-regulated learning, as is necessary for
students in higher education. For example, they propose that ‘Good quality external feedback
is information that helps students troubleshoot their own performance and self-correct’ (p.208).
This is clearly applicable in A-level Mathematics, as guiding students to find and correct their
mistakes, or understand a concept more deeply, is more beneficial to their learning than simply
stating it for them.
Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick also talk about the importance of goals and feedback being under-
stood by the student, otherwise incorrect interpretations of goals negatively impact student
performance and the value of feedback. Their argument stems from students and tutors having
differing conceptions of goals and criteria for essays in certain undergraduate courses, and state-
ments of expected standards and criteria for academic tasks often do not convey the full extent
of their meaning. While this is less of an issue in mathematics, where goals are arguably easier
to precisely define, the overall principle of course holds true; it follows logically that feedback
will not be as useful as it should be if it is not understood by students.
Principle (7) is, in essence, the use of marking and feedback as a formative assessment, where it
helps the teacher shape further teaching. One way of doing this would be to allow students time
to go over the feedback given, and potentially attempt carefully designed tasks or ‘diagnostic
questions’ which help hone specific skills or address misconceptions. This is supported by
Wiliam (2014), who states that ‘Feedback should be more work for the student that it is for
the teacher’, and if students are not using it productively, then it is a waste of time.

2.2 Self-assessment

It is also argued that an effective way to develop self-regulation is to provide opportunities for
‘suitably organised self-assessment’. Studies in higher education have shown that self-assessment

7
benefits learning, especially when it is integrated with tutor feedback. This idea is supported
by Black and Wiliam, who conclude that
if formative assessment is to be productive, pupils should be trained in self-assessment
so that they can understand the main purposes of their learning and thereby grasp
what they need to do to achieve. (1998, p.143)
However, they also argue that self-assessment can only happen when students are clear on the
goals they are attempting to achieve. I believe that this is less of an issue in A-level, where
opportunities for self-assessment would be, say, students checking their answers to questions
they have attempted. In this case, as long as the student understands the concepts they are
studying, the goal is well-defined, ie. they are aiming for the correct answer.
Allowing students to mark their own answers can be an effective form of self-assessment (Hodgen
and Wiliam, 2006), as they can check instantly whether their answer is right or wrong, and then
attempt to find the mistake in their solution. Doing this has clear metacognitive benefits to the
student, and also they are providing themselves with timely, ‘in-the-moment’ feedback, which
is generally accepted to make feedback more effective (Chetwynd and Dobbyn, 2013). This also
ties in nicely with the ‘Feedback about processing of the task’ level in the Hattie and Timperley
model (2007, p.93), which is effective at enhancing deeper learning.
Further to this, students marking their own answers would save teachers time that they can
then spend looking at other aspects of the students’ solutions, such as clarity and good use of
mathematical notation. This is something that teachers would be able to pick up on better
than students, and thus feedback on this from the teacher can be integrated with the students’
self-assessments. Hodgen and Wiliam (2006) propose that rather than simply asking students
to improve their presentation, ‘a more effective strategy is to use the notion of an audience for a
pupils work’ (no pagination). Articulating their solutions with clarity and good mathematical
style is something that students often find challenging, but once they get it right, they find it
conducive to accuracy in their work. As such, this should be a focus of feedback from teachers
when marking work, and indeed it is something I have been big on when marking work.

2.3 Self-esteem and Motivation

As mentioned in Sections 1.2 and 1.3, A-level Mathematics can be a testing time for many
students, often with adverse effects on their self-esteem. On top of this, feedback from teachers
can have a demoralising effect on students if it is often critical. However, it can be difficult for
teachers to give positive feedback to students if they are constantly struggling with the work
involved.
One way to mitigate this could be for teachers to give comment-only feedback and avoid giving
marks or grades unless absolutely necessary (eg. for an end of unit assessment). Kluger and
DeNisi (1996) showed that feedback which emphasises judgement by marks or grades actually
lowered performance. Hodgen and Wiliam (2006) argue that giving marks is not useful feedback
because
marks do not give learners the advice on how the work - or the learners understanding
- can be improved; marks emphasise competition not personal improvement; and
marks demotivate low attainers and provide no challenge to high attainers. (no
pagination)

8
I have observed these effects, particularly low-attaining students becoming demotivated, not
only at A-level, but also at GCSE level after the introduction of the new, tougher specifica-
tion.
Butler (1988) claims that a reason for the ineffectiveness of marks and grades is that they
divert the student’s attention away from the strengths and weakness of a piece of work onto the
self (ego-involvement); this would be ‘Feedback about the self as a person’ within Hattie and
Timperley’s model, which they argue is the least effective level of feedback. Butler also indicated
that compromising by providing both marks and comments would be useless as students would
only focus on the mark rather than reading the advice for improvement.
On the contrary, Anh and Zeckhauser (2012) conducted a study which showed that ‘rank in-
centive can improve the performance of all: individuals work harder, gain more knowledge, and
collectively perform better’ (p.649). This is an interesting proposition for A-level students: not
only could a low rank give students a reality check regarding the difficulty of A-level (maybe
after years of coasting and achieving well in school), but it could also provide a motivation to not
‘lose face’ amongst their peers. Unlike in more subjective, essay-based subjects, the ranking in
a mathematics class would be fully transparent and unambiguous, where students know exactly
where they went wrong and would be able to set themselves clear goals to improve.
While competition may not have played a significant part in most students’ academic lives prior
to starting their A-levels, it now takes on a more meaningful role. For example, students are
competing against their peers and others across the country for university and apprenticeship
places, or jobs. It is also not uncommon for university courses to determine grades for students
according to their ranking against their immediate peers. There is therefore an argument that
using a ranking system in an A-level classroom, which would still be a relatively low-stakes
environment, could be beneficial for students in preparing them for the future.
However, it must be noted that Anh and Zeckhauser’s study was conducted in Vietnam, where
educational attainment is strongly valued and there is a tradition of avoiding ‘losing face’. Thus,
there may be cultural differences that need to be taken into account when applying a similar
system in the UK.
When trying to motivate students with written feedback, I, and other teachers, often use praise.
Hattie and Timperley (2007) suggest that praise that deflects attention from the task to the self
has little information regarding learning and is therefore ineffective. However, they distinguish
between this and praise that is directed towards effort and processes related to the task, which
they claim can enhance self-efficacy. Within the context of A-level, it is interesting that they
raise the concern that
older students perceived praise after success or neutral feedback after failure as an
indication that the teacher perceived their ability to be low. When given criticism
after failure and neutral feedback after success, they perceived that the teacher had
estimated their ability to be high and their effort low. (p.97)
I have occasionally seen this in practice, where older students think this way or perceive the
praise to be disingenuous.
I have also noticed that on occasion, negative feedback about work is perceived by the student
to be an attack on their self. Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006) suggest that ‘it is important that
students understand that feedback is an evaluation, not of the person but of the performance
in context’ (p.212). This again supports the idea of ensuring feedback is directed towards the
task and not to the self.

9
3 Conclusion

It is apparent that the process of giving feedback to students is a complex one, and is arguably
even more difficult in A-level Mathematics due to more factors that need to be taken into
account. There is obvious potential for teacher feedback to have a negative impact on a student,
and while this must be borne in mind, it does not mean teacher feedback should be abandoned.
As Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick point out, ‘teachers are much more effective in identifying errors
or misconceptions in students work than peers or the students themselves’ (2006, p.208).
There are indeed common themes in the literature regarding the provision of effective feedback.
One of these is that the student must know and understand clear goals that will help take their
learning forward, they should be made aware of where they are in relation to these goals, and
then they should be given ways to alter the gap between the two. However, at the challenging
time that is A-level, we must ensure that, as teachers, we sometimes move away from the ‘ideal
minus’ model, where feedback serves to point out where students have fallen short, onto a
threshold plus model, where students are praised for the strengths of their work (Chetwynd and
Dobbyn, 2011).
We must also be careful not to fall into the trap of always trying to be nice and not be critical
when giving feedback. It is, after all, our jobs as teachers to help our students progress in their
learning, and sometimes this must involve pointing out mistakes and weaknesses so that they
can be subsequently improved. This should be done in a way that allows the students to become
self-regulated learners, setting them up for their future beyond school. While there is a weight
of evidence behind not giving grades to students in feedback - indeed, I personally believe in
the strength of comment-only marking - they are sometimes necessary, such as after summative
assessments, and could even provide students with that extra incentive to improve.
All in all, giving feedback is a very difficult job for teachers, especially when taking into account
the high-stakes environment we are all in. However, the power of feedback to have a positive
impact is unmistakeable, and dealing with all of the extraneous variables at play hinges on the
teacher’s skill, knowledge, good judgement, and, perhaps most importantly, relationships with
the students.

10
4 Appendices

The following reflections are on a series of formative assessment episodes with Year 13 A-
level Mathematics and Further Mathematics students. In particular, the reflections focus on
times when I have given feedback (written and verbal) to students regarding their work and
the subsequent impact this has had. Throughout, I have utilised comment-only marking and
avoided giving marks and grades to students to ensure that the focus is completely on the
written feedback. This approach is supported by Elliott et al. (2016).
These reflections are based on my experience at Deyes High School, Maghull. The A-level
Mathematics students are in classes that are big enough so that there is a positive atmosphere
cultivated amongst the students, but small enough so that each student receives personalised
support from the teacher.

4.1 Reflection - Presentation and Notation

While teaching the Year 13 A-level Further Mathematics class, I noticed that two students had
particularly poor presentation and use of notation in their work. Although these students had
quite a solid understanding of the concepts they were being taught, their written answers were
not receiving as much credit as they should have done because they lacked mathematical clarity,
making it difficult for someone else to read and decipher. The students were in essence doing
the hard part right - some of the concepts they were learning were very complex and high-level,
and most students struggled to assimilate the mathematics involved. Instead, it was the easy
part of presenting their work clearly that was letting them down.
As such, when marking their work and giving feedback, I didn’t simply mark their answers as
right or wrong; instead, I critiqued their written mathematics and encouraged them to present
their work with logical arguments, correct notation, and brief explanations (as described in
Seaton, 2013, cited in Rycroft-Smith, 2017, p.2). Through constantly setting the students the
goal of improving presentation on their written work, and consistently reinforcing this within
the classroom when giving verbal feedback or modelling solutions, clear progress was seen over
the term. The written work improved and had much more mathematical clarity, making it
easier for me as the marker to understand. It was pleasing to see that the feedback had a
positive effect on the students.
The students were clearly shown the desired performance level and helped to evaluate their
current performance level. Alongside this, clear feedback was given with techniques and ap-
proaches the students could use to close the gap between their current and desired performance
level. The feedback did not focus on the person; only the strengths and weaknesses of the
particular piece of work were focused on. This approach is supported by Hodgen and Wiliam
(2006), Hattie and Timperley (2007), and Sadler (1989).

4.2 Reflection - Algebra and Problem-Solving

While teaching a Year 13 A-level Mathematics class, we were covering some of the topics in
the course by looking at problem-solving style questions. When going through the questions
in class, Student A - who was usually quite passive in lesson and considered to be a lower-
level learner - was contributing to the lesson enthusiastically and demonstrated understanding,
insight, and some mathematical flair when answering my questions. Conversely, Student B -

11
who was usually quite diligent in lesson when completing routine classwork and was generally
perceived to be a high attainer - struggled to make progress with the more difficult questions
and often could not see the next steps in the solution.
After marking the students’ work and running one-to-one support sessions with them, the
reasons became apparent. Student A clearly had the aptitude to understand mathematical
concepts and solve problems, but really lacked fluency in foundational skills like algebra which
are necessary for being able to access A-level material. This weakness was severely hindering the
student when attempting even routine classwork; though the student could often understand
the concepts and see what to do next, they could not perform the routine tasks required to solve
problems. Meanwhile, Student B was able to competently perform the routine tasks and had
the necessary fluency in the prerequisite skills, but lacked a little flair when it came to seeing
solutions to more complex mathematical problems.
I gave both students feedback regarding this information, and set them tasks to do in order to
improve on their weaknesses, which would subsequently lead to their strengths shining through
more. Although the initial feedback was somewhat negative and critical, both students found it
comforting to actually understand why their overall performance levels were below par, which
was becoming a source of concern for them both. They also relished having specific goals to
attain and methods to do this. Indeed, the feedback had a positive effect on the students and
it was pleasing to see the subsequent progress they made.
This approach could be considered to be process-oriented feedback, as it focuses on individual
strengths and weaknesses, and is supported by Rakoczy et al. (2013).

4.3 Reflection - Problem-Solving

While teaching Year 13 A-level Mathematics classes, I set them homework of problem-solving
questions, covering AS-level Mathematics material. As the students were in Year 13, I assumed
that they were confident and fluent with the AS-level material, and would be able to access
the problem-solving questions. However, the homework was poorly received by the students
and they found them extremely difficult; most students could barely scrape together a partial
solution.
When marking the work that was handed in, I believed that the students simply found the
questions too hard, and as such I gave very detailed written feedback. It later transpired that
the students were not particularly comfortable with the material itself and had quite a limited
understanding of it, which meant that the problem-solving questions were completely out of
reach for them. The written feedback clearly did not have much of an effect, if any, as the
students were not actually able to understand and use the feedback effectively to take their
learning forward. Instead, it would have been better for me to simply spend the time covering
the topics again with the students in class. This approach is supported by Hattie and Timperley
(2007).

12
5 References

Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom
Assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), pp.139-144.

Butler, R. (1988). Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation: The effects of task-
involving and ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance. British Journal of Ed-
ucational Psychology, 58, pp. 1-14.

Chetwynd, F. and Dobbyn, C. (2011). Assessment, Feedback and Marking Guides in Distance
Education. Open Learning, 26(1), pp.67-78.

Elliott, V., Baird, J.A., Hopfenbeck, T.N., Ingram, J., Thompson, I., Usher, N., Zantout, M.,
Richardson, J. and Coleman, R. (2016). A marked improvement? A review of the evidence on
written marking. London: Education Endowment Foundation.

Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research,
77, pp.81-112.

Hodgen, J. and Wiliam, D. (2006) Mathematics inside the black box: Assessment for learning
in the mathematics classroom, London: GL Assessment.

Kluger, A. N. and DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A

historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological
Bulletin, 119(2), pp.254-284.

Lawton, F. (2006). Online Distance Learning Units for Mathematics, Theories of Learning,
Skemp’s Theory [online]. St Martin’s College. Available from: <http://ictedusrv.cumbria.
ac.uk/maths/pgdl/unit1/unit1/page_80.htm> [accessed 23 December 2017].

NCETM (2016). Guidance on Marking and Feedback for Secondary Mathematics Teaching [on-
line]. National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics. Available from <https:
//www.ncetm.org.uk/public/files/40764571/Secondary+Marking+Guidance+(October+2016)
.pdf> [accessed 24 December 2017].

Nicol, D. and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning:

a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2),
pp.199-218.

Oxford Education (2016). Mark McCourt researchED Maths and Science [online]. Available
from: YouTube <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYltDufP_00> [accessed 23 December
2017].

13
Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., Klieme, E., Blum, W. and Hochweber, J. (2013). Written feedback in
mathematics: Mediated by students’ perception, moderated by goal orientation. Learning and
Instruction, 27, pp.63-73.

Rycroft-Smith, L. (2017). What are the Characteristics of Effective Feedback to Mathematics

Students?, Espresso 9. Cambridge: Cambridge Mathematics.

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

Tran, A. and Zeckhauser, R. (2012). Rank as an inherent incentive: Evidence from a field
experiment. Journal of Public Economics, 96(9-10), pp.645-650.

Wiliam, D., Brown, M., Kerslake, D., Martin, S. and Neill, H. (1999). The Transition from
GCSE to A-level in Mathematics: A Preliminary Study. Advances in Mathematics Education,
1(1), pp.41-56.

Wiliam, D. (2014). Is the Feedback You’re Giving Students Helping or Hindering? [on-
line]. Dylan Wiliam Center. Available from: <http://www.dylanwiliamcenter.com/is-
the-feedback-you-are-giving-students-helping-or-hindering/> [accessed 23 Decem-
ber 2017].

14