Keywords

1 Introduction

Internationally, the capabilities of independent learning and critical judgment are regarded as two essential attributes that undergraduate students should develop in an age of knowledge economy (Barnett, 2004; Kantar, 2014; Knight, 2006; McNeill, Gosper, & Jing, 2012). Individuals need to engage in independent learning in the workplace in order to set learning objectives for gaining knowledge and skills to meet new demands of work. As a regular part of their professional jobs, individuals also need to make critical judgements about their own and others’ work. These two capabilities are interrelated in that only when students are equipped with the capability for making critical judgment (e.g., strengths and weaknesses of one’s work) can they act as independent learners who make informed decisions about their own learning (e.g., where to put more effort in next steps) (Clark, 2012; Sadler, 2010). Hence, it rests on higher education teachers to facilitate undergraduate students’ development of these core capabilities through the design and implementation of appropriate teaching and assessment (Crisp, 2012; McNeill, et al., 2012).

To achieve teaching excellence which is key to higher education teachers’ capacity for designing enhanced learning experience to improve students’ learning, it is necessary for teachers to engage in professional development opportunities through Scholarship of Learning and Teaching (SoLT, see the introductory chapter of this book). By pursuing SoLT activities through inquiry, reflection, and dissemination of research findings on learning and teaching, such as the pedagogical practices discussed in this chapter, teachers can make long-lasting impact on students’ learning (Vardi & Quin, 2011).

Existing research indicates that first-year students experience a challenging period of academic transition as they move from secondary school to higher education. The increased demand on first-year students to demonstrate independent learning and related academic skills (e.g., setting short- and long-term learning goals, allocating relevant learning materials, and time-management) leads to their need for extensive learning support (Ballinger, 2003; Pitkethly & Prosser, 2001).

Empirical studies conducted by researchers in the West show that difficulties in academic transition result in some students’ withdrawal from higher education (Yorke & Longden, 2004). In the East where retention is not a serious problem, challenges in students’ induction to academic skills have been reported (Yang, Webster, & Prosser, 2011). One of the purposes of this chapter is therefore to offer insights into the provision of learning support for first-year students in the context of Hong Kong, an East Asian society where the learning culture at school and in higher education has been shaped, at least in part, by the Confucian culture (Brown & Wang, 2013; Carless, 2011).

SoLT highlights the use of alternative forms of formative assessment as support for students learning. One form of learning support for first-year students is the teachers’ feedback that facilitates students’ regular learning progression and inducts them to the habits of thinking independently and reflecting critically about subject matter (Nicol, 2009; Rolfe, 2011). The current chapter is particularly concerned with the integration of feedback strategies into the pedagogical design of undergraduate courses with a view to helping first-year students to develop independence and criticality in academic learning.

This chapter sets out to explore the research question: How can feedback strategies be implemented to support first-year students’ independent learning and critical judgment? Specifically, it reports a case study in which first-year students were provided with formative feedback through tutorial lessons of a General Studies Foundation Course. Qualitative data were collected via two class observations, a tutor interview, and two focus groups. By examining the role of feedback in scaffolding students’ progressive development of the capabilities of independent learning and critical judgment, the findings illuminate specific issues related to the deployment of use of teacher feedback and peer feedback within a purposefully structured tutorial lesson framework. Implications are drawn for teachers, administrators, and researchers in higher education who aim to develop sustainable learning support for first-year students through the use of feedback strategies as an integral part of the pedagogical design of academic courses.

2 Pedagogical Principles to Support First-Year Students’ Independent Learning and Critical Judgment

The research literature reveals mal-alignment between first-year students’ demand for learning support and the teacher guidance and feedback that they receive (Orsmond & Merry, 2011). In a qualitative study on the feedback experiences of 23 staff and 145 students in six schools and three English universities, for example, Beaumont, O’Doherty, and Shannon (2011) found notable differences between the teacher feedback and support that students received at senior secondary school and at university. While students were provided with regular formative feedback and suggestions at secondary school, the feedbacks they received at university were mostly summative judgments on their end-of-semester assignments. Beaumont and associates’ (2011) findings resonate with Price and associates’ (2011) observation that while the university students in their study were frustrated by inadequate teacher feedback to help them improve performance in assessments, their teachers also felt discouraged by the little attention that students paid to feedback commentaries on assignments.

Adding to this perplexing picture of the gap in teachers’ and students’ experiences of feedback is the research evidence on differences between teachers’ and students’ views about the quality and quantity of feedback, with teachers reporting more positive perceptions about their feedback provision while students being less satisfied with this aspect of their programs (Bailey & Garner, 2010; Carless, 2006; Watty et al., 2013). The feedback gap delineated above calls for higher education teachers’ and administers’ attention to the need to formulate suitable feedback strategies to support first-year students’ adaptation to university learning (Beaumont, et al., 2011; Rolfe, 2011).

Researchers have stressed both the evaluative and formative roles of feedback. Whereas feedback should inform students on the distance between their current and expected levels of understanding, it should also help students shorten the distance by equipping them with skills and strategies to make improvements (Sadler, 2013). One of the reasons giving rise to the feedback gap is certain teachers’ and institutions’ insufficient attention to the formative role of feedback, as suggested by Li and De Luca’s (2014) review of assessment feedback research. Past studies have evidenced the positive effects of feedback strategies on students’ academic performance (Evans, 2013). Examples of feedback strategies include self-assessment, peer assessment, multi-stage assignments, and exemplars illustrating different levels of assessment performance. A common feature of such strategies is the emphasis on inducting students to expected learning outcomes and assessment standards as the learning goals of their course or program. Implementing appropriate feedback strategies thus fulfills the goal to facilitate students in critically evaluating their own work and peers’ learning, which in turn helps them gain independence as learners in their subject areas.

Previous studies also highlight the social aspect of feedback. Viewing feedback as an interactive endeavor is supported by empirical findings from studies reporting the positive effects of teacher–student on students’ study motivation (Boekaerts, 2010; Meyer & Turner, 2002). The social aspect of feedback is reflected by findings from investigations into the role of peer interactions in students’ reflective knowledge building (Roscoe & Chi, 2008; Twiner, Littleton, Coffin, & Whitelock, 2014) and their capability to make critical judgment about their own and peers’ work against assessment criteria and standards (Falchikov, 2007; Sadler, 2010).

In this chapter, Gibbs and Simpson’s (2004) “conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning” are adapted into a set of eight principles of pedagogy to support first-year students’ independent learning and critical judgment. Gibbs and Simpson’s (2004) first three conditions are adapted as principles for analyzing the classroom learning tasks in the case study, while the Conditions 6, 9, and 10 are combined into Principle 4.

  1. Principle 1.

    Learning tasks in the course capture sufficient study time

  2. Principle 2.

    The tasks engage students with important aspects of the course

  3. Principle 3.

    The tasks orient students to productive learning activities

  4. Principle 4.

    Sufficient, detailed, and timely feedback is provided, so that it is attended to and acted upon by students

  5. Principle 5.

    The feedback focuses on students’ learning and performance

  6. Principle 6.

    Feedback is appropriate to the learning goals (criteria and standards) reflected by the assessment tasks

  7. Principle 7.

    Feedback is appropriate to students’ experiences and understanding of assessment and learning

These principles echo current understanding in the research literature regarding the role of feedback in cultivating students as self-regulated learners while giving them sufficient guidance in order to achieve learning goals (Clark, 2012). To the above list another principle may be added, the rationale being the need to engage students with peers in the feedback process as discussed in the preceding paragraphs.

  1. Principle 8.

    Feedback involves students’ contribution to peers’ learning

It should be cautioned that to make these principles work for first-year students (and senior-year students), the learning goals need to be negotiated through teacher–student and peer interactions to reach a common understanding about desired learning outcomes and standards (Millar, 2013). This can be done through group and whole-class discussions of exemplars, collective feedback on students’ ongoing learning and assessment tasks before submission, and consultation sessions on students’ draft assignments. In doing so, students are enabled to gain a sense of independence as well as ownership of the learning and assessment processes (Yang & Carless, 2013). Vermunt and Verloop (1999) suggest maintaining a careful balance between teacher guidance and student independence because of first-year students’ need for teacher support of scaffolding their learning progression and making critical judgments about the quality of their work. How the above principles may be implemented in the context of supporting first-year students’ independent learning and critical judgment is examined by exploring qualitative data of the case study being reported in this chapter.

3 Methods

In the case study, qualitative data were obtained via two classroom observations of tutorial lessons, a tutor interview, and two focus groups with first-year students in a tutorial group of the General Education (GE) Foundation Course. A detailed description of the course background and its pedagogical and feedback design is presented in Sect. 4—The case study.

All 20 students in the tutorial group and the tutor were included in the sample. Informal consents from the class were given to all participants prior to the classroom observations (n = 21), while individual consent was collected from individual participants for the individual interview with the tutor (n = 1) and focus groups with students (n = 4; two students in each group).

3.1 Data Collection

The classroom observations were conducted in two tutorial lessons by making video recordings of learning activities and interactions in the classroom. Field notes were taken about the activities, interactions, and the learning atmosphere during the observed lessons; selected classroom conversations (e.g., whole-class discussions and students’ oral presentations on small group tasks) were transcribed verbatim for subsequent data analysis.

The tutor’s interview and students’ focus groups were conducted soon after the second observed lesson to obtain their authentic narratives. The tutor was asked about the course background, his reasons for arranging learning tasks and giving guidelines and feedback, and perception of students’ participation in the tasks. The students were asked about their experiences of taking part in the tasks and giving, receiving, and using feedback on tasks, as well as the extent to which the feedback was helpful for improving performance in assessments. The interview and focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and sent to the participants for member-checking to ensure the quality of data (Patton, 2002).

3.2 Data Analysis

The classroom observation notes and transcripts of the interview and focus groups were analyzed through data reduction (Miles & Huberman, 1994). After summarizing the key points of the field notes and transcripts, the key points were further condensed into categories of meanings shared by the participants, with each category being illustrated by selected quotes from participants. The categories from the whole data set were then put together by combining similar categories and eliminating those that were irrelevant to the research question. Finally, broad themes were derived by summarizing the categories. In the Findings section, the themes are presented as subheadings, with the tutor’s and the students’ experiences in the course being delineated and supported by their narratives.

4 The Case Study

This section discusses the course background being studied in the case study as well as its pedagogic and feedback design for the provision of sustained learning support for first-year students in the course.

4.1 The Course Being Studied

This chapter examines findings from a case study of a GE Foundation Course taught by the first author to a tutorial class group of 20 students over the two semesters of their first-year undergraduate studies. In the tutorial group, the tutor organized classroom tasks designed with active learning pedagogies, which aimed to nurture students’ capabilities of independent learning and critical judgment. The GE Foundation Course was a compulsory breadth course offered to all first-year undergraduate students in the institution under study. In their weekly lectures and tutorials that were structured with a thematic approach, the students were guided to construct knowledge related to a scope of themes derived from different subject fields. Explicated by the speakers and tutors from philosophical, sociopolitical, and empirical perspectives, such themes exposed the students to complexities of ideologies and persistence of ideological tensions in society. Following the weekly lectures that students took alongside other tutorial groups, the students then attended tutorial sessions in their own classroom. Learning activities in the tutorials typically consisted of individual and small group tasks, and whole-class discussions.

The students were expected to demonstrate appropriate levels of understanding about the core concepts and perspectives learned in the course. They were also required to think, discuss, and write critically about key issues raised in the course in order to meaningfully relate learning in the course to personal beliefs, values, and goals. To demonstrate these expected learning outcomes in the assessments, the students were required to: (1) submit a reflective e-journal to Mahara (an online-learning management system) after each lecture as an ongoing assignment; and (2) submit an individual essay and conduct a group presentation on core themes of the course as end-of-semester assessments.

4.2 The Tutorial Lessons

Previous research indicates the development of critical thinking, reflection, and argumentation skills to be crucial for students’ higher-order learning outcomes (Collins, 2014; Fischer, Bol, & Pribesh, 2011). The major objective of the tutorial lessons in the case study was to assist in students’ development of such skills. In the first semester of the course, students were guided to attempt using these key learning skills, which ranged from comparing multiple perspectives, through identifying and synthesizing evidence and using it to construct arguments, to integrating arguments with personal experiences/views. In the second semester, students practiced applying the skills by discussing key concepts, themes, and issues learned in the course.

The tutor established a structured framework of tutorial design, so that students’ learning activities proceeded in a coherent and steadily paced fashion to meet learning challenges. The tutorial framework consisted of three parts. In the first part of each tutorial, small groups of students were facilitated by the tutor to conduct in a review of contents in the preceding lecture using a set of review questions. The questions required students to identify and reorganize key concepts and issues, related information or facts, and major arguments conveyed in the lecture.

The second part of the lesson is comprised of the tutor’s provision of verbal feedback on students’ e-journals. Selected entries from e-journals downloaded from students’ submissions to Mahara were presented on the lecture room screen. The tutor’s feedback comments were given anonymously, highlighting the aspects in the e-journal entries needing students’ attention. Emphasis was placed on how students might construct meaningful linkages between the concepts, issues, and facts to students’ prior knowledge, experiences, and reflections. Students were invited to share additional comments or alternative ideas on the displayed e-journal entries. Previous research indicates that such public display of students’ work can assist in their improvements by enabling them to critically reflect on fellow students’ understanding and approaches to tasks (Carless, Salter, Yang, & Lam, 2011).

The third part of the tutorial lesson included interactive learning tasks adopting active learning pedagogies, such as role plays, mobile games, and debates. Previous studies have generally supported the positive effects of active learning pedagogies on students’ learning and performance (Bakır, 2011; Gholami, Moghaddam, & Attaran, 2014). Similar to activities in the first and second parts, these tasks helped students to practice critical thinking, argumentation, and reflection skills. In the tasks, students were facilitated to discuss the key concepts/ideas and report their responses to the whole class, with verbal feedback comments given by the tutor and other students.

5 Findings

Based on the qualitative data, four major themes on the pedagogical design to support first-year students’ independent learning and critical judgement emerged from the case study.

5.1 Constructing a Structured Tutorial Framework to Scaffold First-Year Students’ Skills for Independent Learning

To reiterate, an essential requirement of undergraduate studies is demonstrating appropriate academic skills in learning and assessment tasks, which bring about considerable challenges for the first-year students (Ballinger 2003). The structured tutorial framework was regarded by the first-year students to be indispensable in scaffolding their development of such skills, which gradually facilitated them to become capable of independent learning.

In the first part of each tutorial, namely the lecture review, the students were guided to explore the various aspects of the learning materials delivered in the lecture. The students were guided by the review questions to reorganize the materials and build linkages among the concepts, facts, and related issues. The tutor explained:

At the beginning of the tutorial I would ask the students to restate what the speaker mentioned in the lecture. This was for them to give a description (of the message). Through the description, they had to express the key message explicitly… Gradually, they could identify the facts and give their own interpretation. Interpretation is a kind of elaboration; before that, they need to give a good description.

In the second part of the tutorial, the tutor gave verbal feedback on extracts of students’ weekly e-journals, which showed their reflections about lecture themes. The tutor would demonstrate to students the ways of identifying different perspectives on the themes and challenging such perspectives in order to nurture their sensitivity for engaging in critical reflection. As the tutor explained:

The feedback of e-journal was normally presented as questions. The questions provoked their thinking, such as, “Am I thinking on the right track?” “Is it the right direction?” “How do I think further?”

In the third part of the tutorial, students were given tasks requiring them to think critically about the ideas or issues learned in the lecture and tutorial, and construct arguments by reflecting on different perspectives on the ideas. Students’ responses to the tutorial activities were positive, as the students commented:

I think the way the tutor taught us has motivated us to learn.

This course served as a bridge for us to transit from a secondary student to a university student. In the past, we just put all the knowledge and exam materials into our brains without truly understanding their meaning. We are now encouraged to gain deep understanding.

5.2 Using Active Learning Tasks to Involve Students in Critical Thinking and Reflection

Diverse activities were used to engage the students in exploring learning topics in the tutorial lessons. In one of the observed lessons, the students were asked to conduct a debate by taking two sides holding different views on the topic “The chief executive in Hong Kong should be elected by universal suffrage.” Prior to the debate, students reviewed materials about different perspectives on democracy in Hong Kong. In the debate, they were asked to employ these perspectives in relation to personal knowledge and experiences. A student commented:

I like the debate activity. After the debate the tutor pinpointed the important ideas that we suggested and concluded with a set of arguments.

In another lesson, the concept of “executive functioning” was introduced to help students explore the issue of poverty in Hong Kong discussed in the lecture. The students were given 5 min to play a mobile game, Train Conductor 2. The game simulated the condition in which individuals were deprived of adequate resources for making effective decisions in life, which assisted in students’ understanding of the concept.

On the surface the activity was not related to poverty. In fact, it was about life opportunities, the way we think and work, and how we make decisions.

Like the other tasks, the game activity elicited students’ prior knowledge (i.e., life experiences of democracy) and personal experiences (i.e., difficulties in learning to play an unfamiliar game), which aided in their discussion of the issues and concepts in a critical and reflective manner. Students were aware that learning in this way was helpful in their improvement of performance in assessments.

He [the tutor] wanted us to apply what we have learned. And he wanted us to think critically about the issues we discussed.

The best part of the tutorials is that he taught us how to build the linkage of the topics. Once we are able to establish the linkage, we can write a persuasive essay. I believe it’s an important part of my university learning.

The tasks also served to stimulate students’ interests and cater to their abilities, making the classroom activities relevant and meaningful for students’ learning.

The classroom activities were diverse, including games, discussions and debates. This is a good way of teaching that should be retained for the next cohort.

I think through group activities, the tutor could better cater for students’ needs and understand the abilities of different students.

5.3 Employing Frequent Teacher Feedback to Construct a Supportive Learning Climate

The tutor created a safe and trusting atmosphere in the tutorial lessons. This was achieved by showing respect for students’ privacy when giving feedback and using positive comments to encourage active participation in classroom discussions. In this way, students were encouraged to learn from errors.

Our ideas may not be complete. The tutor would point out the errors without disclosing our names.

The tutor gave us a great deal of freedom to think. He praised us when we raised some good points. When we had doubts, he was willing to help us clarify our ideas by giving more examples.

As commented by students, by showing appreciation of students’ own ideas the tutor was able to help students gain a sense of ownership of classroom discussions.

Our tutor would not judge what we said in the discussions. Instead, he would offer a different prospective and take us to the right track of thinking. Although he guided us to think, he would not control what we had to think about.

Tutor feedback was also used to stimulate students’ critical thinking and reflection. For example, in giving feedback on students’ e-journals, the tutor modeled effective ways of interpreting the core concepts and issues from different perspectives, and suggested strategies for improving students’ expressions in the writing.

Our tutor would review our e-journals and explore the various ideas raised by our classmates, which triggered our interest in the topics. In this way, we can also get to know what the other students think.

5.4 Using Peer Learning and Peer Feedback to Develop Critical Judgment

In the tutorial lessons, peer interactions were regularly employed to engage students in deep, critical, and reflective thinking. He utilized peer feedback to encourage active peer dialogues in small group tasks. As a student remarked:

Each group may have their own ideas. We [the small groups] would gather all the ideas at the end of the lesson and draw a conclusion. In this way, we can gain a deeper understanding and broaden our perspectives.

The students were encouraged to give feedback to the presentation of other groups so as to extend the group discussion. The students found such exchange of feedback comments helpful to their learning.

Sometimes my classmates can think of some ideas that I may have overlooked. In this way, we can exchange the ideas among ourselves. And this is very important because learning is two-way but not only individual matter. Learning from each other can facilitate improvement.

Students’ contribution to peer feedback on assessment tasks was also encouraged. For example, following the tutor feedback on the selected e-journal entries, students were invited to make additional comments or raise questions. Such peer-feedback comments were appreciated and readily understood by those who were the writers of the e-journals. At the end of the semester when students conducted group presentations for final assessment, each presenting group received written peer reviews from other groups, which were acted upon by students in composing their final group reports. It may be inferred that students’ capability of critical judgment was cultivated through the classroom interactions, in which peer learning and peer feedback were an integral part.

After studying this course, our horizons are widened because actually we can now use different perspectives to look at things.

6 Discussion and Conclusion

This chapter intends to broaden the conceptualization of learning and teaching in SoLT by exploring issues related to the pedagogical design in academic courses to support first-year students’ development of the capabilities of independent learning and critical judgment. Based on the findings of the case study, four implications that can be drawn in relation to designing and deploying appropriate pedagogy to support first-year students’ learning are now discussed.

First, teachers should be empathetic about first-year students’ learning needs and challenges associated with the transition from secondary school learning to undergraduate studies. Apart from inducting the students to relevant subject issues in their academic courses, they should also be required to develop appropriate learning skills and thinking habits. The case study shows that a clear framework of lesson design can help the students manage the expectations of their learning outcomes in the course. As the elements of independent learning were deliberately employed in the learning tasks, the students were supported to master the skills and habits of making arguments in a disciplined fashion. This echoes McNeill and associates’ (2012) argument for the need to choose suitable learning and assessment tasks in order to orient students’ learning to higher-order learning outcomes.

Second, students who originate from East Asian societies are portrayed in the literature as being reluctant to join classroom conversations and are even characterized as passive learners, possibly due to social norms of the traditional Confucian culture requiring students to obey and respect authoritative figures such as teachers (Carless, 2011). Such characteristics are regarded as impeding formative assessment and feedback strategies to take effect in Eastern Asian classrooms (Thanh Pham & Renshaw, 2015). Nonetheless, the findings of this study provide counter-evidence by showing that when prompted with appropriate guiding questions and afforded a safe and trusting atmosphere, East Asian students can be encouraged to engage actively in thinking and discussing in classrooms (c.f. Chan, 2009). Being able to contribute to classroom learning can, in turn, help students to gain a sense of belonging to their learning communities (Fox, Stevenson, Connelly, Duff, & Dunlop, 2010). As previous studies indicate, students’ learning communities can be established when first-year students enroll in courses such as the GE Foundation Course being reported here, which offer them common learning experiences for developing essential learning skills and thinking habits as well as building support networks comprised of their teachers and peers (Pitkethly & Prosser, 2001).

Third, the study shows that immediate feedback for the students on their performance help them consolidate their efforts and internalize the skills as a learning habit. The design of learning tasks should be purposely allowing the students to express different views and opinions. The feedback should then be focused and elaborated to highlight students’ contribution so as to build their confidence on constructing their own ideas and arguments. By encouraging first-year students’ increasing self-confidence in demonstrating their understanding about learning topics, students were enabled to move toward independent learning. As students gradually develop their learning skills and strategies, the tasks can be increasingly difficult, so that they can be expected to accomplish more complex learning goals (Knight, 2006).

A fourth implication is that feedback can be an interactive endeavor in students’ everyday learning process. The findings show that the students’ learning was facilitated by peer interactions and reviews during the tutorial lessons. To develop their complex judgement, peer conversations either in small groups or in whole-class situation acted as peer-feedback loops that stimulated and challenged them to critically discuss and reflect on learning topics. In such peer-feedback loops initiated and acted upon by students and their peers, the first-year students were mutually engaged in the acts of offering, discussing and commenting on peers’ ideas which broadened their perspectives (Nicol & Boyle, 2003). To further extend such peer-feedback loops, the teacher’s role was important in that by posing challenging questions to invoke deep understanding about the topics, the cognitive demand of classroom discussions was maintained at a suitable level (Vermunt & Verloop, 1999). Since the feedback comments were given at the very moments when their learning tasks and assessment tasks were being undertaken, students were provided with as well as contributed to immediate, specific, and constructive feedback that they acted upon almost immediately, generating a sustainable feedback cycle for constant improvements.

To conclude, the findings reported here indicate that the eight principles of pedagogy, which are adapted from Gibbs and Simpson’s (2004) work, are suitable to support first-year students in developing their capabilities of independent learning and critical judgment. In managing the transition from secondary school to university, first-year students need extensive support in academic and social aspects of their undergraduate studies. As students’ learning and performance can be limited by the exposure to different concepts and a narrow perspective, the case study shows that providing appropriate feedback can help broaden students’ understanding of concepts and enhance performance (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Meaningful learning tasks combined with sufficient, detailed, and timely feedback for first-year students may guide them to make smooth transition (Beaumont, et al., 2011) and help them develop skills and habits needed for becoming independent learners (Boud & Molloy, 2012).

Although the case study shows that the first-year students in the GE Foundation Course responded positively to the structured tutorial framework and the formative feedback strategies, its findings are not intended for generalization to the wider context of higher education. The value of the case study lies in the insights into the provision of learning support for first-year students’ academic transition through appropriate pedagogical and feedback design. Future research may produce further evidence on the impacts of formative feedback strategies as well as refine the principles of pedagogical and feedback design with the view to promoting first-year students’ independent learning and critical judgement as proposed in the current chapter.