International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 2834-7919   |  e-ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2021, Vol. 17(1) 439-457

An Investigation of Feedback Strategies Used by Science Teachers in the Classroom Setting: A Mixed-Methods Research

Ufuk Özkale & Sedat Kanadlı

pp. 439 - 457   |  DOI:   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2007-09-0003.R1

Published online: February 01, 2021  |   Number of Views: 147  |  Number of Download: 618


This study classifies the verbal feedback of science teachers into praise statements, effort-based feedback statements, negative feedback statements, and ability-based statements, which are also regarded as feedback strategies. The study aims to investigate the feedback strategies used by science teachers in the classroom setting using descriptive research with a general survey design within an exploratory sequential design of mixed-methods research. It employs the Science Course Feedback Perception Scale in data collection. The population of the study consists of the 6th, 7th, and 8th-grade students (N = 1696) and secondary school science teachers (N = 51) affiliated to the Turkish Ministry of National Education in the central districts of Mersin, Turkey in the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 school years. The sample is formed through a theoretical sampling method for qualitative data and convenience sampling and cluster sampling methods for quantitative data. The qualitative data are collected by open-ended questions designed based on expert opinion. The items are reviewed based on expert opinion and the content validity index of the scale is examined. Following that, exploratory factor analysis is performed to test the construct validity of the scale. The factor analysis identified a 4-factor model with 34 items explaining 55.73% of the total variance of the scale. Then, the 4-factor structure of the scale is tested by confirmatory factor analysis. Lastly, the types of feedback given by teachers to the students in the science course are analyzed in terms of gender and grade level.

Keywords: Feedback Strategies, Feedback Types, Science Course, Teacher Feedbacks

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Ozkale, U. & Kanadli, S. (2021). An Investigation of Feedback Strategies Used by Science Teachers in the Classroom Setting: A Mixed-Methods Research . International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(1), 439-457. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2021.329.28

Ozkale, U. and Kanadli, S. (2021). An Investigation of Feedback Strategies Used by Science Teachers in the Classroom Setting: A Mixed-Methods Research . International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(1), pp. 439-457.

Chicago 16th edition
Ozkale, Ufuk and Sedat Kanadli (2021). "An Investigation of Feedback Strategies Used by Science Teachers in the Classroom Setting: A Mixed-Methods Research ". International Journal of Progressive Education 17 (1):439-457. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2021.329.28.

  1. Adrienne, R. (1997). Feedback: Enhancing the performance of adult learners with learning disabilities, National Adult Literacy and Learning Disabilities Center, Washington, DC. [Google Scholar]
  2. Akgül A. ve Çevik O. (2003). İstatistiksel Analiz Teknikleri [Statistical Analysis Techniques]. Emek Ofset: Ankara [Google Scholar]
  3. Alpar, R. (2014). Uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik-güvenirlik [Applied Statistics and Validity-Reliability]. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  4. Blote, A.W. (1995). Students’ self-concept in relation to perceived differential teacher treatment. Learning and Instruction, 5, 221–236. [Google Scholar]
  5. Brinko, K. T. (1990). Optimal conditions for effective feedback, Paper Presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, 16-20 April. [Google Scholar]
  6. Burnett, P.C. (1996). Children’s' self-talk and significant others’ positive and negative statements. Educational Psychology, 16, 57-68. [Google Scholar]
  7. Burnett, P.C. (2002). Teacher praise and feedback and students’ perceptions of the classroom environment. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 22(1), 5-16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  8. Burnett, P.C.,& Mandel, V. (2010). Praise and feedback in the primary classroom: teachers’ and students’ perspectives. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 10, 145-154. [Google Scholar]
  9. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2008). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [A data analysis handbook for social science]. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  10. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2015). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [A data analysis handbook for social science]. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  11. Can, A. (2014). Spss ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi [Quantitative data analysis in scientific research with SPSS]. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  12. Cengiz, E. (2015). Fen bilimleri dersinde öğrenci hataları ve öğretmenlerin bu hatalara verdikleri geri bildirimlerin incelenmesi [Investigating Mistakes Students Make and the Feedback Teachers Provide on these Mistakes]. Yüksek lisans tezi. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü,Trabzon. [Google Scholar]
  13. Comrey, A.L.,& Lee, H.B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276. [Google Scholar]
  14. Creswell, J.W.,Fetters, M.D., & Ivankova, N.V. (2004) Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. The Annals of Family Medicine, 2, 7-12. [Google Scholar]
  15. Çıngı, H. (1994). Örnekleme kuramı [Theory of Sampling]. H.Ü. Fen Fakültesi Yayınları, Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  16. Çobakçor, B.Ö.,Akşan, E., Öztürk, T. ve Çimer, S.O. (2011). İlköğretim matematik öğretmeni adaylarının matematik derslerinden aldığı ve tercih ettiği geri bildirim türleri [Types of Feedback Prospective Mathematics Teachers Receive and Prefer in Mathematics Course]. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 2(1), 46-68. [Google Scholar]
  17. Dökmen, Ü. (1982). Farklı tür geri bildirimlerin öğrenmeye etkisi [The Effect of Different Types of Feedback on Learning]. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 71-80. [Google Scholar]
  18. Field, A. (2000). Discovering statistics using SPSS: Advanced techniques for beginners. London. Sage Publication. [Google Scholar]
  19. Hattie, J. (2003).Teachers make a difference: What is there search evidence? Paper presented at the Building Teacher Quality: What does the research tell us ACER Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from [Google Scholar]
  20. Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London and New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  22. Higgins, R. (2000)."Be More Critical!" Rethinking assessment feedback. Paper Presented at The BERA Conference Cardiff University, September 7-10. [Google Scholar]
  23. Hitz, R. & Driscoll, A. (1989). Praise or encouragement? New insights into praise. Implications for early childhood teachers. Young Children, 43, 6–13. [Google Scholar]
  24. Hutcheson, R. K. & Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social scientist. London: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  25. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. NY: Guilford Publication, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  26. London, M. (1995). Giving feedback: Source-centered antecedents and consequences of constructive and destructive feedback. Human Resource Management Review, 5, 159–188. [Google Scholar]
  27. Lynn, M.R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35, 382–385. [Google Scholar]
  28. Köğce, D. (2012). İlköğretim matematik öğretmenlerinin geri bildirim verme biçimlerinin incelenmesi [Investigating primary mathematics teachers’ ways providing feedback]. Doctoral dissertation. Karadeniz Teknik University, Institute of Educational Science, Trabzon. [Google Scholar]
  29. Meyer, D. K.,&Turner, J. C. (2002). Discovering emotion in classroom motivation research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 107–114. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  30. Merrett, F. & Wheldall, K. (1987).Natural rates of teacher approval and disapproval in British primary and middle school classrooms. Educational Psychology. 57(1), 95-103. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A.M.(1994). Qualitative data analysis.(2nd).Thousand Oak: SAGE [Google Scholar]
  32. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (2015). Qualitative data analysis (S. Akbaba Altun & A. Ersoy, Çev.). (2nd). Pegem Akademi. Ankara [Google Scholar]
  33. Morgan, G. A, Leech, N. L., Gloeckner, G. W., & Barret, K.C. (2004). SPSS for Introductory Statistic: Use and Interpretation. (2nd Edition). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar]
  34. Orlich, C. O., Harder, R. J., Callahan, R. C., Trevisan, M. S., & Brown, A. H. (2007). Teaching strategies: A guide to effective instruction (8th). New York: Houghton Mifflin Company [Google Scholar]
  35. Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual. Maidenhead, PA: Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
  36. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3rd). Thousand Oak: SAGE [Google Scholar]
  37. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems, Instructional Science. 18(2), 119-144. [Google Scholar]
  38. Sauls, D. J. (2004). The Labor Support Questionnaire: Development and psychometric analysis. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 12, 123–312. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  39. Schumacker, R. E. & Lomax R. G.(2010). Beginner's guide to structural equation modeling (3rd edition). NY: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  40. Seçer, İ. (2015). Spss ve Lisrel ile pratik veri analizi: Analiz ve raporlaştırma [Practical Data Analysis with SPSS and Lisrel: Analyzing and Reporting]. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  41. Shepell, W. (2000). Health Quest: A quarterly news letter focusing on mental health issues and concerns. Retrieved from on 03.05.2017 [Google Scholar]
  42. Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  43. Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd Ed.). New York: Harper Collins. [Google Scholar]
  44. Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th Ed.). New York: Allynand Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  45. Tabachnick, B.G. & Fidell. L. S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (Sixth Ed.) Pearson, Boston. [Google Scholar]
  46. Taras, M. (2005). Assessment summative and formative some theoretical reflections. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), 466–478. [Google Scholar]
  47. Tashakkori A. & Cresswell J. W. (2007). The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods, 1, 2-8. [Google Scholar]
  48. Thalheimer, W. & Cook, S., (2002). How to calculate effect sizes from published research: A simplified methodology. Work-Learning Research, 1-9. [Google Scholar]
  49. Türkdoğan A. ve Baki A. (2012). İlköğretim ikinci kademe matematik öğretmenlerinin yanlışlara dönüt vermede kullandıkları dönüt teknikleri [Feedback techniques used by middle school mathematics teachers to give feedback to mistakes]. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 45(2), 157-182. [Google Scholar]
  50. Van De Ridder, J. M. M., Stokking, K. M., McGaghie, W. C., & Ten Cate, O. T. J. (2008). What is feedback in clinical education? Medical education, 42(2), 189-197. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  51. Vermunt, J. D. & N. Verloop. (1999). Congruence and friction between learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 9, 257–280. [Google Scholar]
  52. Vollmeyer, R. & Rheinberg, F. (2005). A surprising effect of feedback on learning. Learning and Instruction, 15(6), 589-602. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]