Comments on Essays: Do students understand what tutors write?

By Kate Chanock. 2000

301 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ef622fb1f3509bf2417de89eb65db5f35c5704ed

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In Literature and Literary Theory

Citations in the corpus

Student perceptions of assessment feedback: a critical scoping review and call for research (2020, unknown): “Chanock (2000), for example, used open-ended items to assess participants’ understanding of specific feedback phrases.”
Moving feedback forward: theory to practice (2013, background): “Chanock (2000) and Weaver (2006) considered that tutor comments needed careful explanation and that students needed advice on understanding and using tutor feedback.”
‘Feed‐forward’: improving students' use of tutors' comments (2007, background): “A recurring criticism that appears very hard for some students to respond is the exhortation to analyse rather than simply describe (see Chanock, 2000).”
Strategies for using feedback students bring to higher education (2009, background): “However, in relation to ‘feedback’ it appears that student learning comes to a full stop on receipt of tutor feedback; the grade shows how well they have done and that is it (Chanock 2000).”
Feedback-dialogues: exploring the student perspective (2012, background): “…problematic, one of the most notable is that numerous studies have stressed that students find feedback difficult to understand, and that lecturers often find it difficult to explain what they mean (Chanock 2000; Higgins, Hartley, and Skelton 2001; Lea and Street 1998; Maclellan, 2001).”
Assessment relationships in higher education: the tension of process and practice (2006, background): “The impersonal nature of this feedback may mean it is experienced by students as something inaccessible or irrelevant (Chanock, 2000 ).”
Enhancing the assessment experience: improving student perceptions, engagement and understanding using online video feedback (2016, background): “In contrast, generic comments such as ‘lacks synthesis of ideas’ or ‘performance was exemplary’ can block further learning as they omit the specific information on which the students can build their knowledge and capabilities (Carless, 2006; Chanock, 2000; Thompson & Lee, 2012).”
The usefulness of feedback (2019, background): “…messy handwritten comments in the margins of essays (Ferguson, 2011; Ryan et al., 2016), the use of unnecessarily complex academic language (Chanock, 2000; Higgins et al., 2001; Mutch, 2003; Sadler, 2010; Winstone et al., 2017), information that is inconsistent between educators, for…”
Is it worth the effort? How feedback influences students’ subsequent submission of assessable work (2007, background): “understand comments that markers take to be self-evident (Chanock, 2000; Lillis & Turner, 2001).”
Different values, different skills? A comparison of essay writing by students from arts and science backgrounds (2005, background): “Similarly, Stockton ( 1995 ) reports that literature majors received remarkably low grades in history and Chanock ( 2000 ) notes a student receiving conflicting comments in history and English.”
Feedback on assessment: students’ perceptions of quality and effectiveness (2008, background): “Certainly some students report difficulty ‘making sense’ of comments (Norton & Norton 2001) or ‘translating’ academic language (Chanock 2000).”
Facilitating productive use of feedback in higher education (2013, background): “For instance, students appreciate specific, detailed, and individualized comments on their own work (Auten, 1992; Ball et al., 2009; Carless, 2006; Chanock, 2000; Ferguson, 2011; Hedgcock and Lefkowitz, 1996; Higgins et al., 2002; Holmes and Papageorgiou, 2009; Hyland, 2000; Lipnevich and Smith,…”
Beyond feedback: developing student capability in complex appraisal (2010, background): “student responses to feedback (Chanock 2000; Orsmond, Merry and Reiling 2005; Nesbit and Burton 2006; Weaver 2006; Lizzio and Wilson 2008; Poulos and Mahony 2008; Walker 2009).”
From copying to learning: using exemplars to engage students with assessment criteria and feedback (2011, background): “Chanock (2000), for example, found considerable variability in the ways students interpreted the words ‘description’ and ‘analysis’, partly because of different traditions across disciplines, and partly because students (especially first-year undergraduates) ‘are not insiders to the disciplines…”