Table 3 Illustrative examples from the analysis of empirical evidence using the teacher feedback literacy competency framework (Boud & Dawson, 2021)

Macro

3

Creates authentic feedback-rich environments

(SRES) Modelling authentic feedback—through rubrics (Arthars et al., 2019)

Makes feedback processes familiar, through regular pushes of information and feedback through the platform (Matz et al., 2021)

Assists students to utilize information from the environment in which they operate by briefing students on AcaWriter and how the feedback is relevant for assignment (Shibani et al., 2020)

Meso

8

Maximises effects of limited opportunities for feedback

(SRES) Reduces lag time between students’ assessment and feedback—builds forms in SRES to capture performance in in-class assessments, resulting in more efficient marking processes and more detailed feedback (Arthars et al., 2019)

Using the right tool for the job—Academics can select which of 5 tools in ECoach will be best for giving students feedback to optimise learning in their course (Matz et al., 2021)

Reduces lag time between students’ submission and feedback—students get instant feedback on their writing any time they request it (Shibani et al., 2019)

Micro

18

Crafts appropriate inputs to students

(Both OnTask & SRES) Provides comments that identify needed improvements—Instructors craft feedback messages to correct, affirm and motivate (Arthars et al., 2019; Lim et al., 2020)

Provides comments that identify needed improvements—Behavioural scientists work with instructors to craft feedback messages in the Messages tool in ECoach, to affirm and motivate students in achieving their stated goals (Matz et al., 2021)

Provides comments that identify needed improvements—Instructors work with researchers to craft AcaWriter feedback to correct and affirm students’ writing (Knight et al., 2020)