REVIEW article
Front. Educ.
Sec. Higher Education
This article is part of the Research TopicFuture Places of Learning and Higher Education: a Humanistic Perspective.View all 7 articles
A scoping review of dialogic formative feedback practices in higher education
Provisionally accepted
- 1Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Sogndal, Norway
- 2Universitetet i Innlandet - Studiested Lillehammer, Lillehammer, Norway
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background: Feedback practices in higher education are important for student learning and engagement, and unfortunately, both students and university teachers report being dissatisfied with existing feedback practices. Existing practices are often summative instead of formative, and it has been proposed that the use of formative feedback can enhance learning and student satisfaction in higher education. This preregistered scoping review (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2J4M5) aimed to map the current literature on dialogic formative feedback in higher education and provide an overview of the various approaches to dialogic formative feedback and the evaluation of outcomes of these practices as reported in the literature. Method: The review followed established methodological frameworks for scoping reviews and report according to the PRISMA Extensions for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. We searched ERIC, Scopus, CINAHL, the Teacher Reference Centre, and sources of grey literature to identify relevant studies. The search strategy was developed in collaboration with a research librarian, who conducted the final search. Two independent reviewers screened all identified records against predefined inclusion criteria. Results: A total of 40 sources met the inclusion criteria. The studies varied considerably in terms of the purpose, setting, and content. However, most records described aims related to cognitive growth and increased self-regulated learning. Feedback was delivered across diverse contexts, most commonly in small group settings. The records identified several student-and teacher-related factors that appeared to influence the learning outcomes of formative feedback. Most of the sources focused on cognitive and affective measures (n = 11) or students' experiences and perceptions (n = 10), while comparatively fewer examined teacher experiences and perceptions (n = 2) or academic achievement outcomes (n = 5). Conclusions: The findings suggest that dialogic formative feedback can be implemented in a wide range of higher education contexts to promote self-regulated learning and cognitive development. Future research should investigate its effectiveness in improving academic achievement and further explore the impact of dialogic formative feedback on students' educational outcomes, as well as teachers' perspectives on applying dialogic feedback practices.
Keywords: Dialogic formative feedback, Formative feedback, formative assessment, Shared assessment, higher education
Received: 01 Sep 2025; Accepted: 20 Oct 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Nedrehagen, Vee, Stokstad and Orm. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Tove Sandvoll Vee, tove.sandvoll.vee@hvl.no
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.