Background: Abundant research has been undertaken on the importance of teachers’ feedback to the school achievement of students. However, focus has rarely been placed on the differences between the perception on feedback of students and teachers. Being a part of the study which was sponsored by a General Research Grant awarded by Research Grants Council of UGC, Hong Kong (Project Number 844011), we attempted to find out the differences between students’ and teachers’ perception on feedback. Aims and Keywords: The study aimed to find out the differences between Hong Kong primary school students and teachers in their views to feedback. Sample: Four thousand five hundred and seven students between primary 3 and primary 5, 132 teachers from 26 Hong Kong primary schools were sampled in the study. Method: A 42-item instrument with 4-Likert point response scale was constructed by the research team to collect the responses from Hong Kong students and teachers of their perception on 6 dimensions in feedback. Multidimensional Rasch analysis was conducted on the collected data with CONQUEST 2.0. Results: The results showed that: (1) item-fit was between 0.5 and 1.5 for all items except one; (2) Rasch person reliabilities in the 6 dimensions ranged from 0.72 to 0.86 and item reliabilities was 1.00; (3) the effect size of the respondents’ status (teacher or student) in the 6 dimensions ranged from 0.32 to 0.64. Conclusions: In this study, there are moderate differences between the students and teachers in the perception on the source of feedback, the effectiveness of feedback and the function of feedback. On the other hand, there are little differences among the two types of respondents in the perception on the goodness of feedback, the focus/target of feedback and the expectation of feedback.

Background: This study was part of a large-scale quasi-experiment on the causal relations among feedback, self-directed learning, and mathematics achievement of primary students in Hong Kong. The larger study was sponsored by a General Research Grant awarded by Research Grants Council of UGC, Hong Kong (Project Number 844011). Aims and Keywords: The study aimed to develop and validate, using a Rasch approach, of an instrument for measuring mathematics achievement of Primary five students. Sample: The sample comprised 1,368 Primary 5 students from 16 Hong Kong schools who participated voluntarily. Methods: A pre-test/post-test design was used for the larger study. Data for this study were collected at the pre-test in form of a mathematics test completed during class-time. A 35-item mathematics test was developed after careful analysis of the local curriculum, and in consultation with teachers on the suitability of the test for students by the end of Semester One of Primary 5. Rasch analysis with the Winsteps software (version 3.70) was then used to validate the instrument. Results: The results showed that: (1) item-fit was between 0.5 and 1.5 for all items except one; (2) Eigen value of the first contrast of the Rasch PCA of Residuals was below 2.0; (3) Rasch person and item reliabilities were 0.80 and 1.00 respectively; (4) there was good alignment between item difficulty and student ability; (5) no gender-DIF was found in the items. Conclusions: Measurement validity is one of the most crucial factors for the overall validity of any research study. This study developed a valid and reliable instrument for measuring mathematics achievement of Primary 5 students.

This study aimed to identify clusters of primary students based on their mathematics achievement, and their perceived usefulness of and expectation of feedback from teachers, and second, to examine profiles of self-regulated learning of the students in these clusters. The sample consisted of 4,570 students at Primary 3 to Primary 5 in Hong Kong. Two-step cluster analysis identified three clusters of students in each year level, namely, low achievers with negative feedback attitudes, high achievers with moderately positive feedback attitudes, and moderate achievers with strong positive feedback attitudes. Further, the clusters of moderate and high achievers shared similar mathematics self-efficacy, but moderate achievers had higher achievement goals and stronger self-regulated learning practices than either high or low achievers. Further, low achievers had the lowest, and moderate achievers the highest, self-regulated learning in mathematics. These results were consistent across year levels.
[Copyright © 2014 National Academy for Educational Research.]