 Well, one of the things that I certainly have made a mistake in my life when I've asked about what are the purposes of feedback is I've seen it in terms of the information we give to students to help them in that progression. I made a mistake many years ago in writing an article saying all we need is dollops of feedback. It turns out that's not the case at all. It turns out that the biggest issue with feedback is how much of it is received. Students actually can give a lot of feedback but we also know that when the teacher gives the feedback to the whole class, every student knows it's not about me. Certainly most kids receive seconds of feedback a day and again reminding us that kids are human and I am a stunningly good selective listener. They also are very good selective listeners and so one of the things we really wanted to focus on is pausing and asking the students what did you understand when I said this? When I gave you this kind of feedback, what's your interpretation? And so the first thing we want to worry about very much is what feedback is received by the student. Do they get that feedback correct? Do they get it and they use it? We know for example at university students of all the things they do in rating our courses, they rate us usually pretty high, they're quite generous except for feedback. And the mistake many institutions do is they then ask how you increase the feedback. Wrong answer. The right answer is how do you increase from the student's perspective feedback about where to next and how do you understand how they are interpreting the feedback because you could write another 10 pages, it may not be received. And so very much the feedback notion and the purposes of feedback is to help the student interpret. So please as you're giving feedback stop, pause and listen to how they understand your feedback. Yes I can certainly talk about the types of feedback but I'm not a great fan of demarcating it into whether it's descriptive feedback or evaluative feedback and prompting feedback and all the different kinds of feedback because it kind of implies that there's a right one at the right time as opposed to this notion of understanding how the student is interpreting the information. Because if you understand how the student's interpreting, you may be the one and you are supposed to be the expert on the room, you may be the one that needs to change the nature of the feedback you give and what level you give it at. For me the types of feedback came to those three questions and those three levels. It comes back to listening to what the student's doing and interpreting them and sometimes you have to give descriptive feedback, sometimes evaluative. This is again why I'm not a great fan of that massive discussion out there whether you should give marks or numbers. Doesn't matter to me. What matters is the interpretation and if the student's interpreting the number, give them numbers. If they're interpreting the comments, give them comments. The biggest problem is more than often students misinterpret the comments but get the marks right. And so it really isn't about the types of feedback, it's about the purpose, it's about how you're reducing that gap. We have three feedback questions and three levels. And each of the questions works at each of the levels. The three questions are where am I going, how am I going and where to next. And they work at each of the levels. The three levels are the task level. This is the level about the content, the knowledge, the information, the surface level. The second level is about the, almost the processing level, the level in which the student is processing their thinking. How do they go about making strategic decisions about where to go next? How do they know what's right and what's wrong in their work? How do they know the level of standard that's required? Have they got alternative ways and alternative strategies of doing things? And the third level is the self-regulation area. This is the area where we want the student to be more involved and self-teaching themselves as to how they go about error detection and strategic thinking. And so the basic argument is each of those three levels, those three questions apply. So at the surface level, as you're learning more information, what content do we need to learn? How much of that content do I know now relative to what I need to learn? And where do I go next to get the more information? And that's where the teacher's very involved. At the second stage, the teacher is also involved, the process level, not as much as the first, but certainly is in there because you cannot assume that if the student gets it wrong, they know another strategy, teach them another strategy, give them some error detection, give them some clues, give them some hints as to where to go, give them the feedback information. But at the third level, you really want the student to do it first. So that's how those three levels and those three questions relate.