The Effect of Feedback from Pupil to Teacher on Assessment for Leaning and Visible Learning: An Ethnographic Case Study in a Community School in England and the Outcome in a State High School in Queensland, Australia
Table 1
(a) The attainment Levels and estimated feedback values from pupils to teachers from January to mid-May in Year 7 set 3 in Phase I. (b) The estimated feedback values from pupil to teacher and the equivalence values of the attainment Levels from January to mid-May and the SAT in April for the participant of Year 7 set 3 in Phase I.
(a)
Case groups
Sex
Name (coded)
Feedback-pupil to teacher*
Behaviourβ
Attainment January
Attainment February
Attainment March
SAT test April
Attainment mid-May
Teaching grade
Predicted grade
Group A
M
James
3
4
4c
4b
4b
4a
5c
5c
5a
M
Brandon
4
4
4c
4b
4a
5c
5c
5c
5a
M
Krystain
4
3
4c
4a
4a
5c
5b
5a
6c
F
Brittany
4
3
4b
4b
4b
5c
5b
5a
6c
F
Ana
3
4
4c
4b
4a
4a
5c
5c
5a
F
Shona
3
3
4c
4b
4b
4a
5c
5c
5b
Group B
M
Manni
1
3
3a
3a
4c
4b
4b
5c
5b
M
Pedro
1
3
3a
3a
4c
4b
4a
5c
5b
M
Jason
0
4
3b
3b
4c
3a
4c
4a
5c
F
Manjot
0
4
3b
3b
3b
3b
4c
4a
5c
F
Kiran
0
4
3b
3b
4c
3a
4c
4a
5c
F
Courtesy
0
4
3a
3a
3a
3a
4c
4a
5c
Estimated pupil to teacher Ffeedback values: (4 maximum, 1 minimum) frequency of feedback from pupil to teacher. Class behaviour real values (4 best, 3 good, and 2 fair). Levels equivalence: 3c = 1; 3b = 1.5; 3a = 1.75; 4c = 2; 4b = 2.5; 4a = 2.75; 5c = 3; 5b = 3.5; 5a = 3.75; 6c or above = 4. See below.
