Title of the research project
The impact of teachers’ feedback on Chinese high school students’ self-efficacy: A case study
in China
Host organisation
Reach Out
Research project focus & aims: (consider here academic rationale)
Providing students with feedback on their performance is an important part of the learning
process. Constructive feedback allow students to gain insight into their performance as well as
ways to improve them (Boud & Molloy, 2013). Therefore, high-quality feedback is one
of the most powerful influence factors on student achievement in education
(Hattie & Timperley, 2007).
This research project focuses on exploring the relationship between the quality of teachers’
oral feedback and students’ self-efficacy within the secondary education setting in China, as
weel as how students and teachers perceive the usefulness of feedback, also aims to identify
how teachers’ oral feedback can be used to improve students’ self-efficacy in learning and the
perceptions of teachers and students of it respectively.
Existing literature have examined the general feedback practice in great details, however,
limited studies have specifically examined oral feedback in classroom settings (Van Der Kleij
& Adie, 2020). Several key recent topics such as evaluative judgement, peer
feedback, exemplars and feedback moderation have not been thoroughly
discussed. The purpose of this study is to address this gap by examining how oral
feedback is used and perceived in secondary education, which is necessary to gain
a better understanding of how feedback is received and perceived during
classroom interactions.
1
From an educator’s perspective, this research clearly presents the opinions of
students who get oral task feedback from their teachers and further enhance
teachers' understanding of the importance to provide oral feedback. Therefore, the
study provides both timely and interesting insights into how teachers can improve
students' self-efficacy through giving feedback, and how they can develop their
knowledge, based on the increasing popularity of self-efficacy in educational
research.
Key research question (s)
1. How are feedback given in high school?
2. How do teachers and students perceive the role and effectiveness of feedback
in Chinese high school?
3. What is the association between teacher’s feedback and the self-efficacy of
high school students?
Literature review*
Providing feedback to students has long been considered one of the most
effective teaching strategies (Black & Wiliam, 1998). Feedback can be offered both
following formal assessments (e.g., written essays) or ongoing spontaneous, oral
feedback during classroom learning (Brookhart, 2016). There are ample studies on
the best feedback-giving practices, but only a small number of studies have
examined the impact of the oral feedback in class, and whether or not it
contributes to improved learning (Hattie & Gan, 2016).
Oral feedback in class is defined as the comments and information that learners
receive from the teachers or from other leaners about the success of a learning
task, based on Butler and Winne's (1995) theory, an external feedback message
(i.e. teacher feedback) is filtered according to a student's prior knowledge and
beliefs before cognitive tactics and strategies are employed, which is a relevant
definition to the research topic. According to Hattie and Timperley (2007), which
gave similar definition as Kulhavy (1977), ‘any of the numerous procedures that are
2
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
used to tell a learner if an instructional response is right or wrong’. This definition
makes the case that learning can be right or wrong, and feedback is limited as a
way of directing oneself to a certain answer whereas many of the things we work
on in our daily lives are much more complex and nuanced.
Self-efficacy refers to an individual's perception of his or her ability to exert
control over his or her own level of functioning (Bandura, 1993), low self-efficacy
students lack confidence in their own abilities and they are always not interested in
taking advantage of opportunities to improve or will not utilize the feedback they
are given. Schunk (1983) proved that self-efficacy increases when students receive
frequent and immediate feedback. As previous research shows that there are
positive correlations between self-efficacy and academic achievement (Pintrich &
De Groot, 1990) and teachers’ feedback can influence self-efficacy, there can be a
discussion that whether oral feedback is a more effective way in promoting selfefficacy than formal feedback.
The study of Agricola (2019) indicates that students who have received verbal
feedback are more likely to believe their efforts, which will lead to positive results
than those who have received written feedback. Based on this, the hypothesis of
this research is that providing positive oral feedback in class is an effect and
direct way in promoting self-efficacy of secondary school students.
Research method(s)
A relativistic ontology is employed in this research proposal as it holds that reality
is a limited set of subjective experiences and that nothing can exist outside of
human minds (Denzin & Lincoln, 2013). In the case of the same phenomenon,
different interpretations can be offered by different individuals (Levers, 2013).
Therefore, even though all interviewees shared the same experience of receiving
feedback from teachers in class, they interpreted such situations differently due to
differences in backgrounds such as age, gender or academic level.
Epistemology is concerned with the nature of knowledge (Merriam & Tisdell, 2017).
3
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
The purpose of this research is not only to decode the meaning attributed to
participants’ experiences in providing feedback, but also to facilitate the
comprehension of research issues by considering contextual elements throughout
the text.
The above synthetic description of ontology and epistemology unambiguously
locate the paradigm as interpretivism, based on this, thematic data analysis will be
employed, which is designed to search for common or shared meanings (Kiger and
Varpio,2020), also can mitigate the possibility of dialogical intersubjectivity in the
interpretation of findings (Kvale, 2007). Qualitative research requires the collection
and analysis of large quantities and multiple types of data, including expressions,
vocabularies, gestures, and larger unspoken implications within communication
(Miles & Huberman, 1994), which make results of a reflection of what the
participants shared, focused on “behaviours”, “experiences” and “opinions”, that
is, confirmability.
The research conducted will be a descriptive case study of three high school
teachers from three different subjects and three students in a same class that is
qualitative in nature. Semi-structured interviews and observation will be used to
collect data.
snowball sampling
The chosen high school and the class will be selected by volunteer. The research
applies snowball sampling, contacting two teachers who usually provide oral task
feedback in class at first, and then, another teacher from different subject was
recommended as survey respondents. Finally, teachers ask their students who
might be interested in participating in this research and choose three from them.
The reason to choose three teachers and three students is that it may be helpful
to observe the behaviours of teachers and students in different subjects, which
make the research more comprehensive.
Semi-structured interviews & Observations
In the data collection phase, this research employed the 1-1 semi-structured
4
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
interview approach to capture the participants’ responses to the question two, the
opinions that teacher provide task feedback in class and how they do in class,
which will take place before observations. In order to response to the question
one, a couple of weeks of observations will take place within teachers’ classes.
The second interview will take place following the observations and focus on the
teacher's opinions of whether they think oral feedback can have a impact on the
self-efficacy of students, which answers question three. The method of semistructured interview is a combination of closed and open-ended question format,
which allows the interview to be structured and have a chance to ask and response
freely at the same time. Both the interviews will be conducted by telephone and
will last for an hour in order to get more details of the perspectives of the
respondents, further, the interview will be recorded and transcribed, which protect
the individual information of respondents.
Validity/Trustworthiness
Guided by the interpretivist paradigm, the research method used in this study was
the case study that should be evaluated according to the criteria of qualitative
research. Evaluation is intended to ensure the trustworthiness of the study, reflect
on the research procedure, and recognize the limitations of this investigation.
Marshall (1996) pointed out that the conclusions and outcomes of qualitative
research project will focus more on transferability than generalisability, which
means that although the findings cannot be widely applied, it can serve as a basis
for further study and provide important implications. As a qualitative research
project, the research relies on text and image data, rather than numbers, and
qualitative research tends to focus on the participants’ opinions, experiences and
perspectives, therefore the outcomes of the study will be valid and reliable.
During the interview and the process of data collection and analysis, the
researcher inevitably hold their own biases and thoughts, which is subjectivity
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2017). For example, before the interviews, the researcher may
take it for granted that most of the task feedback is provided after doing a task,
and so designed questions are likely to ignore the answers that provided before
5
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
doing a task, yet the study results may be less comprehensive.
Ethics
Ethical approval will be obtained from the University of Manchester Ethics of
research before the commencement of research and will be conducted in
adherence with ethical guidelines of the British Educational Research Association
BERA 2018 throughout its implementation (BERA, 2018). Although the investigation
will take place outside the UK (in China), the principles presented in the guidelines
still apply (BERA, 2018).
Informed consent: Researchers should make their participation in a research study
a voluntary decision based upon a thorough understanding of the nature of the
work, and the potential risks are involved(Bulmer, 1979). During the research
process, an elaborate information sheet and consent form will be provided, in
order to safeguard the right to informed consent of the interviewees.
Right to withdraw: After the interviews, the contact details of the researcher, the
supervisor and the university will be all provided to the respondents. Meanwhile,
the interviewees can pull out of the research at any time and for any reason.
Data storage: Participants are entitled to know the methods, reasons and purposes
of storage and transparency of data concerning individuals (Chassang, 2017).
Throughout this study, the researcher will adhere to the UK Data Protection Act
(1998) as well as any associated subsequent acts, such as the newly implemented
stricter General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which comes into effect on
2018. Furthermore, a password-protected hard drive will be used to store all data
obtained in this study, in a secure location, with access restricted to the
researcher and supervisor, and will be permanently sealed after the study is
completed.
Timescale : week by week plan
Below is a rough timeline of how this research project will be carried out. This
project will take place about 10 weeks.
6
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
Week 1: Conducting a literature review in order to establish a theoretical
framework for this study.
Week 2: Identification of participants, completion of consent forms,
communication of details of the project to participants, as well as responses to
any questions from participants will be conducted.
Week 3: The first semi-structured interview will be conducted with all participants
individually, aiming to ask the teachers and students that how do they think about
giving task feedback and how to do in class. Audio recordings will be taken in
order to ensure that all details are captured as well as accuracy of transcription.
Week 4: Observation of classroom in subject 1-Chinese: Aim: view teacher 1 giving
feedback before and after a task in the session of a week.
Brief comparison of observations with semi-structured interviews conducted by
teacher 1.
Week 5: Observation of classroom in subject 2-Mathematics: Aim: view teacher 2
giving feedback before and after a task in the session of a week. A brief
comparison with interview and teacher 1.
Week 6: Observation of classroom in subject 3-English: Aim: view teacher 3 giving
feedback before and after a task in the session of a week. Comparisons briefly.
Week 7: Conduction of the second semi-structured interview; Aim to find out what
teachers think of the impact of providing feedback for students before and after
going to do a task as well as the perspectives of students that the relationship
between this action and self-efficacy.
Week 8: Transcribe interviews, code the answers in order not to left any
information and create a summary of participant responses, using thematic
analysis. The collected data discussed with supervisor.
7
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
Week 9: Completion of a full draft on findings; draft sent to supervisor for
feedback.
Week 10: Supervisor feedback received, make any alterations if necessary. Citation
checking completed.
Week 11: Final submission.
Bibliography
Agricola, B.T., Prins, F.J. and Sluijsmans, D.M. (2019) “Impact of feedback request
forms and verbal feedback on higher education students’ feedback perception,
self-efficacy, and motivation,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy &
Practice, 27(1), pp. 6–25. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2019.1688764.
Bandura, A. (1993) “Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and
functioning,” Educational Psychologist, 28(2), pp. 117–148. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3.
Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998) “Assessment and classroom learning,” Assessment
in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), pp. 7–74. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102.
Brookhart, S.M. (2016) “Summative and formative feedback,” The Cambridge
Handbook of Instructional Feedback, pp. 52–78. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316832134.005.
BERA (2018) Ethical guidelines for educational research. 4th edn. Available at:
https://www.bera.ac.uk/researchers-resources/publications/ethical-guidelinesfor-educational
research-2018
Boud, D. and Molloy, E. (2013) “Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The
challenge of design,” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), pp.
698–712. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.691462.
Bulmer, M. (1979) Censuses, surveys and privacy. Macmillan.
Butler, D.L. and Winne, P.H. (1995) “Feedback and self-regulated learning: A
theoretical synthesis,” Review of Educational Research, 65(3), pp. 245–281.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245.
Chassang, G. (2017) “The impact of the EU general data protection regulation on
8
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
scientific research,” ecancermedicalscience, 11. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2017.709.
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2013) Collecting and interpreting qualitative
materials. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Farrokhi, F. and Mahmoudi-Hamidabad, A., 2012. Rethinking convenience sampling:
Defining
quality criteria. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 2(4).
“Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment” (2016). Available at:
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315749136.
Hattie, J. and Gan, M. (2016) “Instruction based on feedback,” Handbook of
Research on Learning and Instruction[Preprint]. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203839089.ch13.
Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007) “The power of feedback,” Review of
Educational Research, 77(1), pp. 81–112. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.
Kiger, M. E., & Varpio, L. (2020). Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE
Guide No. 131. Medical teacher, 42(8), 846-854.
Kulhavy, R.W. (1977) “Feedback in written instruction,” Review of Educational
Research, 47(2), pp. 211–232. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543047002211.
Kvale, S., 2007. Validation and generalization of interview knowledge. Doing
interviews,
pp.121-129.
Levers, M.-J.D. (2013) “Philosophical paradigms, grounded theory, and
perspectives on emergence,” SAGE Open, 3(4), p. 215824401351724. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013517243.
Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family practice, 13(6),
522-526.
Merriam, S.B. and Tisdell, E.J. (2017) Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Vancouver, B.C.: Langara College.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded
sourcebook. Thousand Oaks u.a.: Sage.
Pintrich, P.R. and De Groot, E.V. (1990) “Motivational and self-regulated learning
components of classroom academic performance.,” Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82(1), pp. 33–40. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/00220663.82.1.33.
9
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
Schunk, D.H. (1983) “Developing children's self-efficacy and skills: The roles of
social comparative information and goal setting,” Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 8(1), pp. 76–86. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0361476x(83)90036-x.
Van Der Kleij, F. and Adie, L. (2020) “Towards effective feedback: An investigation
of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of oral feedback in classroom
practice,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(3), pp. 252–
270. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2020.1748871.
10
Declarations
Supervision:
 I have received feedback from my early submission of the proposed research summary and
project agreement form.
 I have discussed my research questions with my tutor in a peer study group tutorial.
 I have used the University of Manchester Ethics tool to evaluate the ethical risk of my project.
 I understand that as I will not be conducting the research this year, I do not need to complete or
submit the ERM form to obtain Ethical approval, however I am aware I would need to discuss
this with my project supervisor before completing any research in future projects.
References
Agricola, B.T., Prins, F.J. and Sluijsmans, D.M. (2019) “Impact of feedback request
forms and verbal feedback on higher education students’ feedback perception,
self-efficacy, and motivation,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy &
Practice, 27(1), pp. 6–25. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2019.1688764.
Bandura, A. (1993) “Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and
functioning,” Educational Psychologist, 28(2), pp. 117–148. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3.
Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998) “Assessment and classroom learning,” Assessment
in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), pp. 7–74. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102.
Brookhart, S.M. (2016) “Summative and formative feedback,” The Cambridge
Handbook of Instructional Feedback, pp. 52–78. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316832134.005.
BERA (2018) Ethical guidelines for educational research. 4th edn. Available at:
https://www.bera.ac.uk/researchers-resources/publications/ethical-guidelinesfor-educational
research-2018
Boud, D. and Molloy, E. (2013) “Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The
challenge of design,” Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), pp.
698–712. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.691462.
Bulmer, M. (1979) Censuses, surveys and privacy. Macmillan.
Butler, D.L. and Winne, P.H. (1995) “Feedback and self-regulated learning: A
theoretical synthesis,” Review of Educational Research, 65(3), pp. 245–281.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245.
Chassang, G. (2017) “The impact of the EU general data protection regulation on
scientific research,” ecancermedicalscience, 11. Available at:
11
https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2017.709.
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2013) Collecting and interpreting qualitative
materials. Los Angeles: SAGE.
“Handbook of human and social conditions in assessment” (2016). Available at:
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315749136.
Hattie, J. and Gan, M. (2016) “Instruction based on feedback,” Handbook of
Research on Learning and Instruction[Preprint]. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203839089.ch13.
Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007) “The power of feedback,” Review of
Educational Research, 77(1), pp. 81–112. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.
Kiger, M. E., & Varpio, L. (2020). Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE
Guide No. 131. Medical teacher, 42(8), 846-854.
Kulhavy, R.W. (1977) “Feedback in written instruction,” Review of Educational
Research, 47(2), pp. 211–232. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543047002211.
Kvale, S., 2007. Validation and generalization of interview knowledge. Doing
interviews,
pp.121-129.
Levers, M.-J.D. (2013) “Philosophical paradigms, grounded theory, and
perspectives on emergence,” SAGE Open, 3(4), p. 215824401351724. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013517243.
Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family practice, 13(6),
522-526.
Merriam, S.B. and Tisdell, E.J. (2017) Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Vancouver, B.C.: Langara College.
Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded
sourcebook. Thousand Oaks u.a.: Sage.
Pintrich, P.R. and De Groot, E.V. (1990) “Motivational and self-regulated learning
components of classroom academic performance.,” Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82(1), pp. 33–40. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/00220663.82.1.33.
Schunk, D.H. (1983) “Developing children's self-efficacy and skills: The roles of
social comparative information and goal setting,” Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 8(1), pp. 76–86. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0361476x(83)90036-x.
12
Van Der Kleij, F. and Adie, L. (2020) “Towards effective feedback: An investigation
of teachers’ and students’ perceptions of oral feedback in classroom
practice,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(3), pp. 252–
270. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2020.1748871.
Appendix
1. Original Literature review with peer reviewed feedback comments.
Topic: Self efficacy and task feedback in secondary education
Objectives
Three selective studies examined the challenges brought about by assessment
feedback on students’ engagement in secondary schools. The study by Ryan
(2020) looked into both secondary and tertiary students’ engagement, preferences
and perceived impact of digitally recorded feedback. The second study by Van Der
Kleij and Adie (2020) focuses on examining similarities and differences in feedback
perceptions related to the purpose, meaning and value of oral classroom feedback
among teachers and students. Specifically, this paper reports on an in-depth study
of similarities and differences of teachers’ and students’ reflective comments on
oral feedback. Lastly, Dawson’s (2018) study reports a quantitative investigation of
what educators and students think the purpose of feedback is, and what they think
makes feedback effective.
Methodology & Findings
The study by Ryan (2020) is a quantitative research , which uses a cross-sectional
mixed-methods survey design. The dataset used in this study was compiled from
several past research： (e.g. those from both secondary school (SS) and HE
students. However, only 16 matching survey items from the HE studies
(aggregating data from two subsequent years) and the SS study are included as
there were slight differences between the items in each survey. The online survey
completed by HE students comprised 35 items, while the SS student survey
included 34 items. The most significant finding is that majority of SS students felt
positive about the digitally recorded feedback comments, and almost all students
wanted educators to continue to provide comments in this way. In addition, a high
13
proportion of SS students preferred digital recordings to text, or preferred both
modes equally. With regard to impact, at least half of all students felt that the
recorded comments were useful to help their understanding and confidence when
completing future work.
Van Der Kleij and Adie (2020) also use quantitative research, two different
discipline areas were chosen to determine if there were any discipline-specific
differences in how feedback was perceived by students, focused data in one
Australian secondary school. The teacher and students in turn participated in
individual video-stimulated recall (VSR) interviews, during which the classroom
observation video was displayed on the iPad. During the VSR sessions, participants
were asked to pause the video whenever they identified feedback, and comment
on this particular feedback instance, the differences and similarities in individual
participants’ perceptions of feedback can be examined by their non-overlapping
and overlapping VSR video pauses and the nature of their VSR
commentary. Central to their argument is the apparent mismatch of
understandings around the nature and purpose of feedback between teacher and
students and among students
In the study by Dawson’s (2018), semi-structured interviews were conducted, opted
for a sample of 200 student responses from each institution (total 400) that was
representative of the characteristics of the overall populations in terms of gender,
international/domestic enrolment, online/on-campus enrolment, and faculty. The
researchers found that from the staff perspective, feedback was made effective
primarily through design concerns like timing, modalities and connected tasks
while from the student perspective, feedback was made effective through highquality comments which were usable, sufficiently detailed, attended to affect and
appeared to be about the student’s own work.
However, there are still several frontier topics in feedback that have not featured
in recent effective feedback experiences in the study above such as evaluative
judgement, peer feedback, exemplars and feedback moderation.
Peer Reviewer feedback comments
14
Mingyu Jiang
Reviewed quite a lot literatures to demonstrate the main idea. Also included several different
perspectives and critiques. Well structured but lack coherence between sentences.
Ruiyao Gu
Overall, this literature review has identified a clear education topic with a foucs on three pieces
of studies. Also, you have included comparisons among the literature, but I would suggest that
you can write more about the similarities and differences. Rather than simply summarizing
those literature’s arguments, you can be more critical on them, for example, you can criticize
on certain limitations of the research. Finally, I would suggest that you need to add a
conclusion to summarize the review, and consider for your further study and future research.
2.ERM
3. Proposal summary form:
Project Proposal Summary
1. Research topic – what is the proposed title for your research project?
15
EDUC 20730 Planning a research project
Topic: The effect of teachers’ assignment feedback on students’ self-efficacy
in learning a foreign language in high school aged 16-18 in China
This research project will focus on exploring the relationship between feedback
and self-efficacy, within the secondary education setting. Aim to find how
teacher’s feedback can be used to improve students’ self-efficacy in learning
and the challenges to it. Providing students with feedback on their performance
is an important part of the learning process, as it can allow them to gain insight
into their performance as well as provide them with valuable information about
how they can improve
their performance (Boud & Molloy, 2013).
2. Proposed educational setting for the project
This research will take place within the geographical context of the China. The
student body population consists of a diverse social and racial demographic.
Age group: 16-18 high school students
Sample size: focus group, 3-6 people
3. Key research question (s)
1.Can providing feedback improve a pupil’s sense of self efficacy?
2.How can teachers use the information from this research to practically
implement effective feedback strategies?
3.Using evidence from pupil experience, what are the strengths and
weaknesses of different kinds of feedback?
4. Proposed planned research approach and activities
In this project, experiments are the overarching research design. I will be
exploring the impact of feedback (the independent variable) on self-efficacy
(the dependent variable). Firstly, I will carry out a background literature review
of previous work on self-efficacy and teachers’ feedback to inform the basis of
my research. Secondly, I will glean qualitative data by carrying out structured
interviews. To
be more specific, it can be researched by examining the effects of different
types of teachers’ evaluative feedback on students’ self-efficacy in foreign
language learning. With regards to sampling procedure and participants, the
participants will be composed of secondary school students, this will lead to
some ethical issues. I will aim to conduct interviews within 30 minutes long, to
test whether their self-efficacy have change using different types of feedback.
Semi-structured interview
Before and after teachers providing assignment feedback
16
4. PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET
OVERVIEW:
You are being invited to take part in a research study for a unit coursework. The main aim of
this research is to explore the extent to which providing oral task feedback within class can
improve self-efficacy for students in Secondary Education. Before you decide whether to take
part, it is important for you to understand why the research is being conducted and what it will
involve. Please take time to read the following carefully before deciding whether to
participate. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask me, or discuss with others.
Contact details for me will be provided in this information sheet.
ABOUT THE RESEARCH:
•The research will be conducted by myself, XXXXXXXX. I am a second year
Undergraduate at the University of Manchester, School of Environment, Education and
Development.
•The purpose of this research is to explore the relationship between providing task feedback
in class and self-efficacy and use my analysis of this to suggest how teachers can use these
finding in practise.
•These exact research settings and participants were chosen since they are already in an
academic setting. The participants are students in secondary education at this institution, and
are currently in a class that the teachers giving feedback during the session.
•The findings of the research will not be published as the nature of the research is a unit
coursework assignment.
•The research will be reviewed at regular intervals by the research supervisor, Dr Sara
Jackson of the University of Manchester
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT IN THE RESEARCH:
•If you choose to take part, you will participate in to 1-1 interviews with the
17
researcher. The first interview will take place in the third week of term, and the second will
take place in the seventh week of term. The interview will consist of pre-set questions
regarding your sense of self-efficacy in the subject you are being
taught. The interviews will be 60 minutes long.
•The specific day and time of the interviews are flexible, depending on the availability of the
participant.
•There will be no financial compensation for participants for taking part in this
research project.
•If you do not want to take part in this research, please inform me via email (the
contact details will be provided below), or in person. It is up to you to decide whether to take
part.
•If you do want to take part in this research, please inform me via email or in person. Then,
you will be given this information sheet to keep and will be asked to sign a consent form. If
you decide to take part, you are still free to withdraw at any time without giving a reason and
without detriment to yourself. However, it will not be possible to remove your data from the
project once it has been anonymised as we will not be able to identify your specific data. This
does not affect your data
protection rights. If you decide not to take part, you do not need to do anything
further.
•The interviews will be audio recorded. However, you are always free to decline the
recording since it is not essential for the research project. It will only help the
researcher analyse better the provided data. You should be comfortable with the
recording process. You are free to stop the recording at any time.
DATA PROTECTION AND CONFIDENTIALITY
•To participate in this research project, we will need to collect information that could identify.
This is called "personal identifiable information". Specifically, we will need to collect:
• Your name when you sign the consent form (it will not be mentioned at
any point in the research project)
• During the interviews the recordings will consist of voice only. The
interview will be conducted on face-t o-face basis.
18
•We are collecting and storing this personal identifiable information in accordance with data
protection law which protect your rights. These state that we must have a legal basis (specific
reason) for collecting your data. For this study, the specific reason is that it is " a public
interest task" and "a process necessary for research purposes".
•You have several rights under data protection law regarding your personal information. For
example, you can request a copy of the information we hold about you, including audio
recordings if you have been invited to an interview.
•If you would like to know more about your different rights or the way we use your personal
information to ensure we follow the law, please consult our Privacy Notice for Research.
•In accordance with data protection law, The University of Manchester is the Data
Controller for this project. This means that we are responsible for making sure your
personal information is kept secure, confidential, and used only in the way you have been told
it will be used. All researchers are trained with this in mind, and your data will be looked after
in the following way:
• To ensure confidentiality, no one real name will be mentioned in the research project.
• The researcher will be anonymising the data and it will be fully anonymised.
• Only the researcher and t heir supervisor at The University of Manchester will have access to
your personal information, but they will anonymise it as soon as possible. Your name and any
other identifying information will be removed. Only the research team will have access to the
key links. Your consent form and contact details will be retained for as long as the project
continues and after that will be removed since the research project will l not be published.
For audio recordings:
• The main researcher, XXXXXXXXXXXX, will be transcribing the interview.
• Personal information will not be required during the recording and if mentioned it
will be removed from the recording.
• The recording will be destroyed right after the researcher transcribes the data.
COMPLAINTS:
• If you have a complaint that you wish to direct to members of the research team,
please contact:
Email: XXXXXXXXXXXX
19
•If you have a complaint that you wish to direct to an individual independent of the
research team, please contact:
Email: researchcomplaints@manchester.ac.uk
5. INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
INTRODUCTION
Hello, I am a student from the University of Manchester. Thank you for taking the time today
to participate in this interview. This interview should take around 30 minutes each and you are
free to leave if necessary/ in the event of an emergent event. If so, the interview will continue
when you are available. The questions will mainly concern your experience of self-efficacy,
your sense of confidence in your ability in your subject area. It is an anonymous interview,
and your answers will be protected. Only myself and my supervisor will access your answer,
so please feel free to share. If at any point you are uncomfortable, please feel free to let me
know and we will stop the interview. I will be transcribing throughout the process. If you have
consented to this interview being audio-recorded, it will be.
Questions for interview 1 (for students)
1. On a scale of 1-10 how do you rate your academic performance in your subject
area at present?
2. Why did you choose this number?
3. On a scale of 1-10 how do you rate your confidence in your subject area at
present?
4. Why did you choose this number?
5. Are you satisfied with your current performance in your subject? Why/why not?
6. On a scale of 1-10 how interested are you in your subject area?
20
7. Why/ why not?
(for teachers)
1. Do you think providing task feedback is necessary?
2. How often do you provide task feedback in the class?
3. What do you usually say when providing feedback?
Questions for interview 2: (for students)
1. How confident do you feel in your problem solving ability when faced with
challenging tasks in the class?
2. On a scale of 1-10 how confident do you feel when teacher providing task
feedback before and after doing a task within class?
3. Do you feel that you are encouraged after giving a task feedback?
(for teachers)
1. Do you think providing feedback to students can have a impact on their
performance?
2. When providing feedback, in which ways do you think can help students to
solve the problems better?
21