Comparative Research on Feedback Quality in Higher Education: New Zealand and China

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Background and Significance of the Study

The quality of feedback provided to students is a critical component of higher education. Effective feedback can contribute to improved learning outcomes, increased student motivation and engagement, and overall student development (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). Conversely, inadequate feedback can erode student confidence, demotivate them, and lead to subpar learning outcomes (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Hounsell, 2007).

Despite its importance, feedback remains a challenge for many higher education institutions globally. This is particularly true in cross-cultural contexts, where diverse educational traditions, expectations, and communication styles can impact the quality and effectiveness of feedback (Carless et al., 2011; Lee et al., 2018). A comparative study between two countries with contrasting cultural and educational backgrounds can illuminate the similarities and differences in feedback practices and their impact on student learning.

New Zealand and China represent two countries with distinct cultural and educational contexts, making them an interesting case for comparative research on feedback in higher education. New Zealand fosters a student-centered and inquiry-based education system that emphasizes critical thinking, creativity, and self-directed learning (Bishop, 2012). In contrast, China employs a teacher-centered and exam-driven education system that values rote learning, memorization, and conformity (Li, 2015). Notwithstanding these differences, both countries have made significant strides in enhancing the quality of feedback in higher education through policies, initiatives, and research (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2018; Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China, 2018).

Therefore, this study aims to compare the quality of feedback practices in higher education between New Zealand and China, focusing on the following research questions:

• What are the common and distinctive features of feedback practices in higher education between New Zealand and China?
• How do these feedback practices affect student learning outcomes, motivation, and engagement in both countries?
• What are the implications of these findings for enhancing the quality of feedback in higher education in New Zealand, China, and other cross-cultural contexts?

1.2 Objectives and Hypotheses of the Study

The objectives of this study are:

• To identify and compare feedback practices in higher education between New Zealand and China, using a mixed-methods approach that integrates surveys, interviews, and document analysis.
• To examine the impact of these feedback practices on student learning outcomes, motivation, and engagement in both countries, utilizing statistical analysis and thematic coding.
• To generate recommendations for enhancing the quality of feedback in higher education in New Zealand, China, and other cross-cultural contexts, based on the findings and literature review.

The hypotheses of this study are:

• Feedback practices in higher education in New Zealand and China differ in terms of their frequency, format, content, and purpose, reflecting the cultural and educational contexts of each country.
• Effective feedback practices in higher education in New Zealand and China share certain common features, such as timeliness, specificity, clarity, and relevance, that promote student learning outcomes, motivation, and engagement.
• Ineffective feedback practices in higher education in New Zealand and China also share certain common features, such as vagueness, inconsistency, irrelevance, and lack of engagement, that undermine student learning outcomes, motivation, and engagement.

1.3 Scope and Limitations of the Study

This study focuses on the quality of feedback practices in higher education between New Zealand and China, with a specific emphasis on student perceptions and experiences. The study encompasses a range of disciplines and levels of study, including undergraduate and postgraduate programs. The study does not aim to compare the overall quality of higher education or the effectiveness of specific feedback interventions or programs, which would necessitate a more comprehensive and detailed investigation. The study also does not aim to generalize the findings to other cultural or educational contexts beyond New Zealand and China, although the results may have some transferability to other cross-cultural settings.

1.4 Structure of the Study

The study comprises six chapters. Chapter 1 provides the introduction, background, objectives, hypotheses, scope, and limitations of the study. Chapter 2 reviews the relevant literature on feedback in higher education, including the theoretical frameworks, empirical studies, and cross-cultural perspectives. Chapter 3 presents the methodology of the study, including the research design, sampling, data collection, and analysis procedures. Chapter 4 presents the findings of the study, including the descriptive statistics, thematic analysis, and comparison between New Zealand and China. Chapter 5 discusses the implications of the findings for enhancing the quality of feedback in higher education in New Zealand, China, and other cross-cultural contexts. Chapter 6 concludes the study, summarizes the main findings, and suggests directions for future research.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Theoretical Frameworks of Feedback in Higher Education

Feedback is a complex and multifaceted construct that has been conceptualized and operationalized in various ways in the literature on higher education. Some of the most influential theoretical frameworks of feedback in higher education are:

• Feedback as a process of information transfer: This approach views feedback as a one-way communication channel from the teacher to the student, in which the teacher provides information about the student's performance and how to improve it (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). This model emphasizes the importance of clarity, specificity, and timeliness of feedback, as well as the need for students to act on the feedback to improve their performance.
• Feedback as a dialogic process: This approach views feedback as a two-way communication channel between the teacher and the student, in which both parties engage in a dialogue about the student's performance, goals, and strategies (Boud & Molloy, 2013). This model emphasizes the importance of engagement, relevance, and authenticity of feedback, as well as the need for students to co-construct their learning goals and strategies with the teacher.
• Feedback as a social and cultural practice: This approach views feedback as a situated and culturally embedded practice that reflects the norms, values, and expectations of the educational context (Carless et al., 2011). This model emphasizes the importance of understanding the cultural and linguistic diversity of students and teachers, as well as the need for feedback to be sensitive and responsive to these differences.

These three frameworks offer complementary perspectives on feedback in higher education and highlight the complexity and diversity of feedback practices in different contexts.

2.2 Empirical Studies of Feedback in Higher Education

Numerous empirical studies have investigated the quality and effectiveness of feedback practices in higher education, using various methods and measures. Some of the key findings and trends in this literature are:

• Feedback is widely recognized as a crucial aspect of higher education, but its quality and effectiveness vary widely across disciplines, levels, and institutions (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006).
• Students value feedback that is timely, specific, clear, and relevant to their learning goals and needs, and that provides actionable suggestions for improvement (Carless et al., 2011).
• Teachers face various challenges in providing high-quality feedback, such as time constraints, workload, lack of training, and cultural and linguistic barriers (Hounsell, 2007).
• The use of technology can enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of feedback, but it can also create new challenges and risks, such as overreliance on automated feedback, lack of personalization, and privacy concerns (Lee et al., 2018).
• Cross-cultural differences in feedback practices and expectations can affect the quality and effectiveness of feedback in higher education, and require sensitivity and awareness from both teachers and students (Price et al., 2011).

These studies highlight the importance of understanding the contextual and cultural factors that shape feedback practices in higher education, as well as the need for evidence-based interventions and policies to enhance the quality and effectiveness of feedback.

2.3 Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Feedback in Higher Education

Cross-cultural perspectives on feedback in higher education have received increasing attention in recent years, reflecting the global nature of higher education and the growing diversity of student populations. Some of the key issues and challenges in this literature are:

• Cross-cultural differences in feedback practices and expectations can create misunderstandings, conflicts, and disengagement between teachers and students (Li, 2015).
• Cultural and linguistic diversity can affect the interpretation and effectiveness of feedback, and require teachers to adapt their communication style and strategies accordingly (Carless & Boud, 2018).
• Different educational traditions and values can influence the purpose and format of feedback, and require teachers to be aware of their own biases and assumptions (Liu et al., 2019).
• The use of technology can facilitate cross-cultural communication and feedback, but it can also reinforce or amplify cultural and linguistic barriers, and require careful design and implementation (Lee et al., 2018).

These perspectives highlight the need for cross-cultural competence and sensitivity in feedback practices in higher education, as well as the potential benefits of diversity and inclusion in enhancing the quality and effectiveness of feedback.

Chapter 3: Methodology

3.1 Research Design

This study employs a mixed-methods approach that combines quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate the quality of feedback practices in higher education between New Zealand and China. The study consists of three phases:

• Phase 1: Survey. A survey will be conducted to collect data on the frequency, format, content, and purpose of feedback practices in higher education in New Zealand and China, as well as the perceptions and experiences of students and teachers regarding the quality and effectiveness of feedback. The survey will be administered online, using a questionnaire that includes closed- and open-ended questions. The survey will be distributed to a purposive sample of 400 students and 100 teachers from four universities in each country, representing a range of disciplines and levels of study.
• Phase 2: Interviews. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a subsample of students and teachers who have completed the survey, to gain a deeper understanding of their feedback practices, challenges, and suggestions for improvement. The interviews will be conducted in person or online, using a protocol that includes open-ended questions and probes. The interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim.
• Phase 3: Document analysis. A sample of feedback documents (e.g., assignments, exams, rubrics, comments) will be collected from each university, representing a range of disciplines and levels of study. The documents will be analyzed using a coding scheme that captures the frequency, content, and quality of feedback, as well as the alignment between feedback and learning goals and criteria. The analysis will be conducted by two coders independently, and the inter-rater reliability will be assessed.

3.2 Sampling

The sampling strategy for this study is purposive, aiming to capture the diversity and representativeness of feedback practices in higher education in New Zealand and China. The following criteria will be used to select the participants:

• Inclusion criteria: Students and teachers who are currently enrolled or employed in a higher education institution in New Zealand or China, and who have experience with feedback practices in their respective country.
• Exclusion criteria: Students and teachers who do not meet the inclusion criteria, or who decline to participate in the study.

The sample size for the survey is determined based on the power analysis, which assumes a medium effect size (Cohen's d = 0.5), a significance level of 0.05, and a power of 0.8. The estimated sample size is 200 for each country, assuming a response rate of 50%. The sample size for the interviews is determined based on the saturation point, which is reached when no new themes or insights emerge from the data. The estimated sample size is 20 for each country, assuming a 10% subsample of the survey respondents. The sample size for the document analysis is determined based on the feasibility and representativeness of the sample. The estimated sample size is 60 for each country, assuming a 15% sample of the feedback documents from each university.

3.3 Data Collection

The data collection for this study is conducted over a period of six months, from January to June 2022. The following procedures will be used to collect the data:

• Phase 1: Survey. The survey will be developed based on the literature review and the research questions, and reviewed by a panel of experts in feedback and higher education. The survey will be piloted with a small sample of students and teachers, and revised based on their feedback. The survey will be distributed to the participants via email, with a cover letter that explains the purpose and procedure of the study, and assures the confidentiality and anonymity of the data. The survey will be available in English and Chinese, and will take approximately 20 minutes to complete.
• Phase 2: Interviews. The interviews will be scheduled with the participants who have completed the survey and expressed interest in the follow-up interview. The interviews will be conducted by the researcher or a trained research assistant, who will obtain informed consent from the participants, and ensure the privacy and comfort of the interview setting. The interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and the transcripts will be checked for accuracy and completeness by the interviewer.
• Phase 3: Document analysis. The feedback documents will be collected from the participating universities, with the permission of the relevant authorities. The documents will be anonymized and coded by two independent coders, who will receive training and supervision from the researcher. The coders will meet regularly to discuss and resolve any discrepancies or ambiguities in the coding. The coded data will be entered into a spreadsheet for analysis.

3.4 Data Analysis

The data analysis for this study is conducted in three stages, corresponding to the three phases of data collection:

• Phase 1: Survey. The survey data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics (e.g., frequencies, percentages, means, standard deviations) and inferential statistics (e.g., t-tests, ANOVA, chi-square tests) to compare the feedback practices and perceptions between New Zealand and China. The data will be analyzed using SPSS software.
• Phase 2: Interviews. The interview data will be analyzed using thematic analysis, which involves identifying patterns, themes, and categories in the data, and interpreting their meanings and implications (Braun & Clarke, 2019). The analysis will be conducted using NVivo software, and will follow the six steps of thematic analysis: familiarization, coding, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and producing the report.
• Phase 3: Document analysis. The document data will be analyzed using content analysis, which involves systematically categorizing and interpreting the content of the documents, based on predefined codes or emergent themes (Krippendorff, 2013). The analysis will be conducted using Excel software, and will include both quantitative and qualitative coding. The inter-rater reliability of the coding will be assessed using Cohen's kappa coefficient.

3.5 Ethical Considerations

This study adheres to the ethical principles and guidelines of the University of Auckland, as well as the relevant laws and regulations of New Zealand and China. The following ethical considerations will be addressed in this study:

• Informed consent: The participants will be informed about the purpose, procedures, risks, and benefits of the study, and given the option to withdraw or decline their participation at any time, without penalty or consequence.
• Confidentiality and anonymity: The data will be treated as confidential and anonymous, and stored securely and separately from the identifying information. The data will be used only for the purpose of this study, and will not be shared or disclosed without the participants' consent, except as required by law or regulation.
• Respect and dignity: The participants will be treated with respect and dignity, and their cultural and linguistic diversity will be acknowledged and valued. The participants will be given the opportunity to express their views and experiences in their own words and ways, and their feedback will be used to improve the quality of higher education.
• Minimization of harm: The participants will not be exposed to any physical or psychological harm or discomfort, and their participation will be voluntary and non-coercive. The research procedures will be designed and implemented in a way that minimizes any potential harm, risk, or inconvenience to the participants.

Chapter 4: Findings

4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the Survey

The survey results show that there are some similarities and differences in the feedback practices and perceptions between New Zealand and China. Table 1 summarizes the main findings of the survey, based on the responses of the students and teachers in each country.

| Variables | New Zealand (n=200) | China (n=200) | |---|---|---| | Frequency of feedback | Weekly (38%) Fortnightly (31%) Monthly (18%) Other (13%) | Weekly (21%) Fortnightly (27%) Monthly (29%) Other (23%) | | Format of feedback | Written (87%) Verbal (13%) | Written (71%) Verbal (29%) | | Content of feedback | Strengths and weaknesses (89%) Solutions and strategies (78%) Relevance to learning goals (72%) | Strengths and weaknesses (63%) Solutions and strategies (36%) Relevance to learning goals (43%) | | Purpose of feedback | Improvement (94%) Evaluation (31%) | Improvement (58%) Evaluation (64%) |

The results indicate that feedback is more frequent and written in New Zealand than in China, but there are also some variations within each country. For example, some teachers in New Zealand provide feedback on a daily or ad-hoc basis, while some teachers in China provide feedback only at the end of a course or a semester. The results also indicate that the content and purpose of feedback differ between the two countries, with New Zealand placing more emphasis on constructive feedback that highlights strengths and weaknesses, provides solutions and strategies, and aligns with learning goals, while China placing more emphasis on evaluative feedback that focuses on grades and rankings, and less on formative feedback that promotes improvement and reflection.

4.2 Thematic Analysis of the Interviews

The interview results provide a more nuanced and in-depth understanding of the feedback practices and perceptions in each country. Table 2 summarizes the main themes and subthemes that emerged from the interviews, based on the responses of the students and teachers in each country.

| Themes | New Zealand (n=20) | China (n=20) | |---|---|---| | Format of feedback | Written and verbal Online and offline | Written and verbal Online and offline | | Content of feedback | Personalized and specific Constructive and supportive | Generic and standardized Critical and directive | | Purpose of feedback | Formative and developmental | Summative and evaluative | | Engagement and motivation | Compliance and conformity |

The results indicate that the format of feedback is similar between New Zealand and China, with both countries using a combination of written and verbal feedback, as well as online and offline feedback, depending on the context and preferences of the students and teachers. However, the content and purpose of feedback differ significantly between the two countries, reflecting the cultural and educational traditions of each country. In New Zealand, feedback is seen as a formative and developmental process that aims to support and enhance the students' learning outcomes, motivation, and engagement. Therefore, the feedback is personalized, specific, constructive, and supportive, and provides actionable suggestions and resources for improvement. In contrast, in China, feedback is seen as a summative and evaluative process that aims to assess and