Focus on Formative Feedback¶
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on Formative Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Formative Assessment
- Not frequent summative testing — piling on more end-of-unit tests does not constitute formative assessment; the distinguishing feature is how the information is used (to inform instruction and learning versus to grade and certify). Not the same as diagnostic pre-assessment alone — while pre-assessment is a legitimate form of formative assessment, the construct encompasses ongoing in-process elicitation, not just beginning-of-unit placement. Not grading — formative assessment is typically not graded, or is graded only minimally; high-stakes grading of formative instruments tends to corrupt the construct by incentivizing students to hide confusion rather than reveal it. Not a single technique — formative assessment comprises a family of practices (exit tickets, cold calls, think-pair-share, draft reviews, hinge questions, etc.), and effective implementation typically uses multiple techniques opportunistically. Not merely teacher-directed — student self-assessment and peer assessment are recognized forms of formative assessment in the Black-Wiliam framework, operationalizing "activating students as owners of their own learning" and "activating students as instructional resources for one another." Not separable from instruction — high-quality formative assessment is integrated into instructional design, not tacked on; assessment-as-learning is the ideal rather than assessment-separate-from-learning. Not data-collection for its own sake — formative assessment is defined by the instructional response to elicited evidence; collecting data without acting on it is not formative assessment in the operational sense. Not identical to feedback — feedback is one important component of formative assessment, but the construct also includes evidence elicitation, teacher interpretation, instructional adjustment, and the broader system of in-loop learning regulation, a distinction Shute (2008) emphasizes in her review Focus on Formative Feedback showing that feedback works only when embedded in a learning system that allows learners to act on it.
This sourceReview showing formative feedback works when nonevaluative, supportive, timely, specific, and embedded in a learning system the learner can act on.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
Shute's abstract defines formative feedback as information given to improve learning, nonevaluative, timely and specific — it does not state the learning-system or construct components of the claim.
“This article reviews the corpus of research on feedback, with a focus on formative feedback—defined as information communicated to the learner that is intended to modify his or her thinking or behavior to improve learning. According to researchers, formative feedback should be nonevaluative, supportive, timely, and specific.”
- Not frequent summative testing — piling on more end-of-unit tests does not constitute formative assessment; the distinguishing feature is how the information is used (to inform instruction and learning versus to grade and certify). Not the same as diagnostic pre-assessment alone — while pre-assessment is a legitimate form of formative assessment, the construct encompasses ongoing in-process elicitation, not just beginning-of-unit placement. Not grading — formative assessment is typically not graded, or is graded only minimally; high-stakes grading of formative instruments tends to corrupt the construct by incentivizing students to hide confusion rather than reveal it. Not a single technique — formative assessment comprises a family of practices (exit tickets, cold calls, think-pair-share, draft reviews, hinge questions, etc.), and effective implementation typically uses multiple techniques opportunistically. Not merely teacher-directed — student self-assessment and peer assessment are recognized forms of formative assessment in the Black-Wiliam framework, operationalizing "activating students as owners of their own learning" and "activating students as instructional resources for one another." Not separable from instruction — high-quality formative assessment is integrated into instructional design, not tacked on; assessment-as-learning is the ideal rather than assessment-separate-from-learning. Not data-collection for its own sake — formative assessment is defined by the instructional response to elicited evidence; collecting data without acting on it is not formative assessment in the operational sense. Not identical to feedback — feedback is one important component of formative assessment, but the construct also includes evidence elicitation, teacher interpretation, instructional adjustment, and the broader system of in-loop learning regulation, a distinction Shute (2008) emphasizes in her review Focus on Formative Feedback showing that feedback works only when embedded in a learning system that allows learners to act on it.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:f1bfe1cc4c78 · see in the full table