Instructor Feedback: How Much Do Students Really Want?

Abstract

Marketing students expect feedback on papers and assignments; and many professors expend much time and effort providing individualized and substantive comments in response to student work. Doing so is challenging and time consuming when faced with large class sizes, high student—faculty ratios, and communications-intensive courses. Furthermore, instructors observe that though students often express desire for feedback, some do not appear to use it. The results of this study suggest that when an instructor provides a lot of feedback, as opposed to a small amount of feedback on an assignment, students receive it negatively. The results also suggest that students respond no more positively than when offered no feedback comments at all. Results suggest that if an instructor wants students to be receptive to the feedback provided because they believe it is fair, because they like the instructor, or because they feel the instructor has a positive impression of them, the instructor should provide only a modest amount of feedback or a moderate number of clear and specific feedback comments. Alternatively, an instructor who wants to offer students a greater amount of feedback needs to allow them to revise and resubmit their assignments.

Keywords

assignment feedback grading feedback comments feedback amount

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ackerman, D.S. , & Gross, B.L. ( 2006). How many choices are good? Measurement of the effects of course choice on perceptions of a marketing option. Journal of Marketing Education, 28, 69-80.

Ackerman, D.S. , Gross, B.L. , & Perner, L. ( 2003). Instructor, student, and employer perceptions on preparing marketing students for changing business landscapes. Journal of Marketing Education, 25, 46-56.

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

Carless, D. ( 2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 219-233.

Dixon, A.L. , Spiro, R.L. , & Jamil, M. ( 2001). Successful and unsuccessful sales calls: Measuring salesperson attributions and behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing , 65, 64-78.

Forsyth, D.R. ( 1980). The functions of attributions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43, 184-189.

Higgins, R. , Hartley, P. , & Skelton, A. ( 2002). The conscientious consumer: Reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 53-64.

Hounsell, D. ( 2003). Student feedback, learning, and development. In M. Slowey & D. Watson (Eds.), Higher education and the lifecourse (pp. 67-78). Berkshire , UK: SRHE & Open University Press.

Hyland, P. ( 2000). Learning from feedback on assessment. In A. Booth & P. Hyland (Eds.), The practice of university history teaching (pp. 233-247). Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.

10.

Jaasma, M.A. , & Koper, R.J. ( 1999). The relationship of student-faculty out-of-class communication to instructor immediacy and trust and to student motivation. Communication Education, 48, 41-47.

11.

Jones, E.E. , & Davis, K.E. ( 1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 219-266). New York: Academic Press.

12.

Lilly, B. , & Tippins, M.J. ( 2002). Enhancing student motivation in marketing classes: Using student management groups. Journal of Marketing Education , 24, 253-264.

13.

Marsh, H.W. ( 1986). Self-serving effect (bias?) in academic attributions: Its relation to academic achievement and the self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 190-200.

14.

Miller, D.T. , & Ross, M. ( 1975). Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? Psychological Bulletin, 82, 213-225.

15.

Mizerski, R.W. ( 1982). An attribution explanation of the disproportionate influence of unfavorable information. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 301-310.

16.

Peterson, R.M. ( 2001). Course participation: An active learning approach employing student documentation. Journal of Marketing Education, 23, 187-194.

17.

Ramsden, P. ( 2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). London: RoutledgeFalmer .

18.

Schmidt, T.A. , Houston, M.B. , Bettencourt, L.A. , & Boughton, P.D. (2003). The impact of voice and justification on students’ perceptions of professors’ fairness . Journal of Marketing Education, 25, 177-186.

19.

Sinclair, H.K. , & Cleland, J.A. ( 2007). Undergraduate medical students: Who seeks formative feedback ? Medical Education, 41, 580-582.

20.

Weiner, B. , Frieze, I. , Kukla, A. , Reed, L. , Rest, S. , & Rosenbaum, R.M. (1971). Perceiving the causes of success and failure. In E. E. Jones , D. E. Kanouse , H. H. Kelley , R. E. Nisbett , S. Valins , & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 95-120). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

21.

Yorke, M. ( 2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Education , 45, 477-501.