Misunderstandings and mismatches: The collective disillusionment of written summative assessment feedback

Feedback is slippery, its meaning changes according to the space(s) you occupy within the perceptual limits that define it; these can range from feedback perceived as correction, to feedback perceived as longitudinal developmental. This provocation focuses on written summative assessment feedback, a format that remains one of the most common practices within academic programmes, that has the potential to be one of the most powerful influences on student growth, development, and learning, and yet which many students report never reading. I develop the argument that written summative assessment feedback is the subject of collective disillusionment - the result of students misunderstanding assessment feedback discourses, and the mismatch(es) between student interpretations and lecturers' intentions of feedback. As provocateur, I argue that collective disillusionment not only risks the negation of written feedback, but it also seriously threatens learning. I draw upon empirical data to illuminate how paying attention to the kind(s) of work the representation of feedback does can contribute to feedback being reframed for participation and offer an open invitation for further dialogue via Research in Education.