Marking and giving Feedback on Pupils’ Class Assignments in Tanzanian Primary Schools: Implications for Pupils’ Learning
|Author(s)||by Aneth A. Komba|
|Keywords||feedbacks, Marking, pupils’ learning, Tanzania, written class assignments.|
|Open Access||Access PDF Open in New Tab|
This study examines how teachers mark and comment on pupils’ classwork in Tanzanian rural primary schools. It: examines the primary school teacher certificate and diploma curriculum to identify how these equip student teachers with the skills required to mark and comment on pupils’ classroom exercises competently; explores how teachers mark pupils’ class work; examines comments/feedback provided on pupils’ class work; and determines the implications of teachers’ feedback for pupil learning. The approach employed was a qualitative visual methodology using a basic/generic qualitative design. Camera, interview and document review were used as the major data collection tools. A sample of 20 pupils, 200 classroom exercises on various subjects in 20 primary schools, two academic masters and two tutors from two public teachers’ colleges informed the study. Observation data collected through camera were analysed using visual content analysis while those collected through interviews and documents were analyzed using thematic and content analysis respectively. The findings indicate that the student teachers had not received any training while at teacher training college on how to mark and comment on pupils’ work and so, once employed, they performed this important activity largely by relying on their past experience as pupils. Other findings indicate good and poor practices related to marking and providing feedback. The poor practices include the teachers’ tendency to tick incorrect answers, offer positive comments on poor quality work, provide negative, abusive, unclear and written comments to pupils who were unable to read, provide comments in English which remained unclear to the pupils. The poor practices provide inaccurate information regarding pupil progress, discourage pupils from learning and attending school, and create a threatening classroom environment. This study recommends the inclusion of module on marking and commenting on pupils’ work during teacher training.
ARTICLE PROCESSING CHARGE
Online Publication & Two Hard Copies
|International Journal of Empirical Finance||$ 100||$ 170|
|International Journal of Financial Economics||$ 80||$ 150|
|International Journal of Management Sciences||$ 100||$ 170|
|Journal of Empirical Economics||$ 80||$ 150|
|Journal of Education and Literature||$ 60||$ 130|
|Quarterly Journal of Business Studies||$ 50||$ 120|
|Journal of Language and Communication||$ 30||$ 100|
|Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities||$ 80||$ 150|
|Journal of Social Economics||$ 30||$ 100|
|International Journal of Financial Markets||$ 30||$ 100|
|Journal of Public Policy & Governance||$ 30||$ 100|
For a peer-reviewed journal, the publication of articles plays an essential role in the development of a coherent network of knowledge. It is, therefore, essential that all publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers, in the process of publishing the journals, conduct themselves in accordance with the highest level of professional ethics and standards. The publisher is dedicated to supporting the vast efforts of the editors, the academic contributions of authors, and the respected volunteer work undertaken by reviewers. The publisher is also responsible for ensuring that the publication system works smoothly, and that ethical guidelines are applied to assist the editor, author, and reviewer in performing their ethical duties.
The editor has the following responsibilities:
1.The editor should acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts within two working days of receipt and ensure an efficient, fair, and timely review process.
2.The editor should ensure that submitted manuscripts are processed in a confidential manner, and that no content of the manuscripts will be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
3.The editor should recuse himself or herself from processing manuscripts if he or she has any conflict of interest with any of the authors or institutions related to the manuscripts.
4.The editor should not disclose the names and other details of the reviewers to a third party without the permission of the reviewers.
5.The editor has the right to make the final decision on whether to accept or reject a manuscript with reference to the significance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript and its relevance to the journal.
6.The editor should by no means make any effort to oblige the authors to cite his or her journal either as an implied or explicit condition of accepting their manuscripts for publication.
7.The editor should not use for his or her own research any part of any data or work reported in submitted and as yet unpublished articles.
8.The editor should respond promptly and take reasonable measures when an ethical complaint occurs concerning a submitted manuscript or a published paper, and the editor should immediately contact and consult with the author. In this case, a written formal retraction or correction may also be required.