Using Feedback to Improve Student Learning: A Learning Progression Approach

Do you remember the last time you gave students feedback on their work, only to have them ignore it and focus solely on their grades? It’s a frustrating experience, but one that many educators can relate to. 

What if there was a way to ensure that your feedback is not only read, but also used to improve students’ performance?

This is where the learning progression approach comes in. 

By breaking down the process of using feedback into specific levels, students are provided with a clear roadmap for how they can improve their performance over time. Using teacher feedback will improve student learning. In this post, we will explore the benefits of implementing a learning progression approach for using feedback in the classroom. Then we can examine how it can help students engage with that feedback in a more meaningful way. 

The Problem

Let me start by telling you a story. 

Ms. Burns was a dedicated science teacher who spent hours grading her students’ work. She wanted to make sure her students understood what they did well and what they needed to improve. She wrote detailed comments, providing specific examples and suggestions for improvement. But as she handed back the papers, she noticed that her students seemed to be more interested in their grades than in her comments. They quickly glanced at the comments and then put the papers away. The next time they had to do a similar assignment, she found herself writing the same comments all over again. Despite her efforts, there was little improvement in their writing.

That was me for most of my career. Can you relate to that? I distinctly remember when I decided to no longer bother writing any comments.  I began to just write “-2”, “good”, and other terse evaluations. I figured, “Why bother? They don’t read them anyway. The students who want more information can come to me to talk!” Well, that didn’t work either. 

Fast forward to 4 years ago, when I had already made the switch to the Learning Progression Model (LPM). I found that students were stuck at the developing levels because even without a grade, they were reading but not using my detailed, descriptive feedback. Feedback is most effective when it is timely, specific, and actionable (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). However, simply providing feedback is simply not enough to ensure that students use it to improve their performance. To encourage students to use feedback, it is important to provide opportunities for them to reflect on their performance and to actively engage with the feedback provided.

"To encourage students to use feedback, it is important to provide opportunities for them to reflect on their performance and to actively engage with the feedback provided." Elise Naramore #ReimaginedSchools

The Using Feedback Learning Progression

To solve this problem, beginning in 2019, we put in a standard for Using Feedback. In my class, the Using Feedback section is where students annotate their lab report, highlighting the changes they made from their previous lab report. The goal is to communicate what changes they made, why they made them, and how they have improved over time. 

This is the Learning Progression I use to develop the skill of “Using Feedback”. In this essay, I am going to describe each level and then provide student work to illustrate what it might look like.

A learning progression provides students with clear expectations for what they are expected to learn and how they can demonstrate their understanding of the material (Wilson & Draney, 2015). If this is your first exposure to this strategy, you might want to visit an earlier blog post about developing Learning Progressions in general as well as a PD course if you prefer video. By breaking down the process of using feedback into specific levels, students are provided with a clear roadmap for how they can improve their performance over time. I ask students to identify changes that they made in response to feedback, and to explain why those changes were necessary. Self-reflection is a critical component of effective feedback use (Butler & Winne, 1995).  Engaging in a process of self-reflection, we can help to students to deepen their understanding of the material.

"By breaking down the process of using feedback into specific levels, students are provided with a clear roadmap for how they can improve their performance over time." Elise Naramore of ReimaginedSchools.com

How do I use this learning progression in my classroom?

I could easily have students do this on every single assignment. However, I have chosen to use this only on lab reports. Why? Because students write about 20 lab reports in my class each year, so I knew they would get enough practice to grow significantly.  Lab reporting, with its complexity, was also an area that I saw a great need. But there is no reason why it cannot be used on any periodic assignment. I would simply substitute the word “assignment” for “lab report” in the learning progression. It would be especially useful any place that you are seeing the same mistakes over and over again despite your descriptive feedback.

I want to walk you through each level of the learning progression approach because it has been so effective in moving students to success in the other 3 lab practices. As with all of my learning progressions, at the start of the year, the class is assumed to be at the Beginning level. As they demonstrate mastery of one level, they move to the next one. In this way, over the course of the year, students progress to higher and higher levels.

The Beginning Level

Identify changes made since the previous lab report.

At the Beginning level, students begin to develop their metacognitive skills by simply reflecting on their own work and identifying areas where they have made changes. According to a study by Veenman, Van Hout-Wolters, and Afflerbach (2006), “metacognitive skills are essential for successful learning and performance, and… they can be acquired through explicit instruction and modeling.” The Beginning level is to simply identify changes that they made on the new assignment in response to my comments on the previous assignment. They might say, 

“I added a source of experimental error.” 

By reflecting on their own work, students can better understand their own thinking and learning processes.

The Developing Level

Describe at least 6 changes made since the previous lab report, correlated to feedback from peers, the instructor, class discussion, or their own understanding of the rubric.

Here, students begin to take feedback into account and incorporate it into their own work. According to Hattie and Timperley (2007), “feedback can provide information about how well students are currently performing, what they need to do to improve, and how to do it.” Describing at least 6 changes that were made since the previous assignment, they correlate it to feedback from peers, the instructor, class discussion, or their own understanding of this rubric. They might say, 

“I added a source of experimental error because last lab I only had one.” 

By explicitly linking their changes to feedback from a variety of sources, students can better understand how to use feedback to improve their own work.

Why do I list six as a requirement? In all honesty, it is completely arbitrary. As a general rule, quantity should not be the determining factor on the rubric. I originally had used the word “multiple”. To students, this means two. It wasn’t sufficient for them to address enough of my comments, so I picked six. You could, however, easily justify ANY number or omit quantity altogether!

The Proficient Level

Explicitly state why changes needed to be made (or not made) based on relevant physics or skills requirements.

At the Proficient level, students move beyond simply incorporating feedback into their work and begin to think critically about why changes need to be made. According to Bandura (1997), “learners who are actively involved in constructing their own understanding will be more successful in retaining and applying that understanding.” Proficient work explicitly states why changes needed to be made (or not made) based on relevant skills requirements. They might say, 

“I added a source of experimental error because in the last lab I only had one. This is important because sources of experimental error show how accurately I did the experiment.” 

The “correction” that they make or the reason they provide may be wrong, as in this example. But by explicitly stating why changes are necessary based on relevant content knowledge, students are better able to understand the underlying principles and apply them in new contexts.

The Advanced Level

Correctly and appropriately make changes based upon feedback received, or correctly state why changes were not made. Request specific feedback from the instructor, identifying areas of uncertainty or struggle.

At the Advanced level, students are able to effectively use feedback to make changes to their work. According to Black and Wiliam (1998), feedback should lead to further improvement, by guiding the learner to the next steps in the learning process.  The novel piece at this level is that students must request specific feedback from the instructor, identifying areas in which they want help. They might say, 

“I added a source of experimental error because in the last lab I only had one. This is important because sources of experimental error show that I am critically examining the setup of the experiment, which will help me get better results next time. Can you help me explain this source better? I am struggling to clearly explain the effect that the unleveled table would have on the results of the experiment.” 

By requesting specific feedback from the instructor and identifying areas of uncertainty or struggle, students are able to focus their efforts on areas where they need the most support. 

The Expert Level

Communicate and document the rationale behind alternate approaches to similar (but not identical) situations, based on feedback received prior to the current attempt. Communicate areas of weakness and document the methodical application of strategies used to improve.

At the Expert level, students are able to generalize their learning to new contexts and develop a deeper understanding of the underlying principles. According to Mayer and Wittrock (2006), “learning is most effective when it is organized in a meaningful way, and when learners can see the connections between new information and prior knowledge.” Expert level shows meaningful and deeply self-aware reflection. 

A true scholar knows their strengths and weaknesses, and can leverage resources to their advantage. This would require a detailed narrative, in which students can apply what they have learned in one class or type of assignment and apply it to another. By documenting their learning and reflecting on the strategies that they have used to improve, students are better able to transfer their learning to new contexts and develop a deeper understanding of the underlying principles. My 11th grade physics classes are not expected to attain this level of achievement; there simply hasn’t been enough time. Therefore, I don’t have any examples. I am thinking about the end-of-semester reflection pieces. These might be an avenue for exploring this level of feedback. Since I currently only do that twice a year, there just aren’t going to be many opportunities for practice. I will have to think about that some more. I can probably incorporate it more frequently, if and when students show that they are ready to engage at that level. 

Implementation in the classroom

Let me show you some student work to make it more clear. The figure below shows the fourth lab report of the year, written by a student I will call Brianna, in October. You can see, in blue, all of my annotations. I try to point out 6-10 items that could be improved. Usually I focus on things that are keeping students from achieving the target levels on the lab report skills. I ignore most other errors/omissions unless that student has mastered the target level and is ready.

Student Using Feedback (Lab 5)

On the very next lab, I look to see if they addressed those items. Here’s the thing: I cannot remember every student’s Lab 4. So the first thing that I need students to do is to describe what they have changed. They put this as a comment in the GoogleDoc. By having them point out what they improved, I can check to see if they did it correctly, if they need more support, and/or if they are ready for the next step.

Ohm's Law Lab with student annotations

In example above, Brianna did point out what she changed. While I provided 7 or more comments on her Lab 4, she chose to address two items on Lab 5. The rubric would show that she earned Beginning level. 

Student Using Feedback (Lab 9)

Over the next month or so, this student wrote 4 more lab reports, annotating her work each time. By the time she got to the last lab report for Unit 2, this is what she was producing.

Freefall Lab with student annotations

We aren’t going to critique the quality of the lab report itself. There are errors and omissions, for sure. But just examine her comments about her own work. Brianna clearly identified what she changed and why. By “why”, I mean what prompted her to make this change. For example, the last comment states, “In the last lab I did not use the right definition that I needed to define, but this time I did.” She clearly points me to the previous lab and the fact that I told her that the reasoning on her CER (Claim-Evidence-Reaoning) was not focused on the physics concept. She might also reference feedback a class discussion or something new she learned from a peer. 

In addition, she chose to address six items. The rubric would show that she earned Developing level. 

Student Using Feedback (Lab 17)

The next step is Proficient level. They go into more detail about the changes they are making, specifically adding why it is important to do so. For example, why do we add pictures of the set up? Why include a screenshot of the graph produced by the sensor? Why do we create a mathematical model? Why do we think about sources of experimental error? According to Black and Wiliam (1998), “A student who automatically follows the diagnostic prescription of a teacher without understanding of its purpose or orientation will not learn. Thus self-assessment by the student is not an interesting option or luxury; it has to be seen as essential.” This is all part of the metacognitive process, and pushes them to understand the purpose of the assignment. Most students tell me that this is most useful tool for their growth. 

It will take many attempts to bring students from Developing to Proficient. It isn’t unusual, because there are more things to consider, and students do not develop linearly! It took Brianna many weeks to move to Proficient, but she did it! Here is her 17th lab report:

Law of Conservation of Momentum Lab with student annotations

I want students to understand that everything required in the lab report has a purpose. None of the parts is arbitrary. If they can begin to internalize the true purpose of each piece then they can begin to have ownership of the writing process, instead of following the script that I have laid out. According to Black and Wiliam (1998), “Feedback was most effective when it was designed to stimulate correction of errors through a thoughtful approach to them in relation to the original learning relevant to the task.”

You can clearly see in her comments that she goes into a lot more detail about why each item is something important to include in the lab report. For example, in the CER, she points out, “In this lab I used a better definition to help the reader understand what I was trying to find. It is important for the reader to have a better understanding of certain terms so it can be easier to answer the main question.”

While not everything she says is accurate, she is moving in that direction, and should continue to improve as she uses my feedback. The rubric would show that she earned Proficient level.

Advanced Level Annotations

When at the proficient level, students are following the correct process, although they may not be accurate. When everything is also correct, they are at the Advanced level.  In addition, when they are ready for the Advanced level, they should be at the point where they are asking ME for specific help on specific areas. That awareness of what they don’t know is where real growth will happen. 

Because it’s only March, my students have not yet reached Advanced level on annotations. Some students are getting close, but I haven’t “opened” up that target level yet for them. However, I anticipate doing that in late April, and will hopefully be able to provide you with an update then!

"Implementing a learning progression is an effective way to help students engage with feedback in a more meaningful way, which in turn leads to improved performance." Elise Naramore #ReimaginedSchools

Conclusion

Implementing a learning progression approach is an effective way to help students engage with feedback in a more meaningful way, which in turn leads to improved performance. Through self-reflection and metacognition, students are encouraged to think deeply about their work and make intentional changes that will lead to growth. As educators, we must continue to explore innovative ways to support student learning and growth, and learning progressions are one such tool that can help us achieve this goal. 

How do you make sure that students read and use the descriptive feedback that you provide? Have you implemented a learning progression appraoch for using feedback in your classroom? Please share your experiences and thoughts in the comments!

References

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
  • Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (2006). Problem-solving transfer. Handbook of Educational Psychology, 2, 47-62.

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3-14.