Recursive feedback is an assessment strategy that goes beyond formative and summative assessments to encompass a broader concept and scope of continual feedback and response among learners, peers, teachers, experts, and perhaps even participants beyond. It is a strategy designed to answer the insufficiencies of narrow item-based testing, which tends to be summative, or focused on a gradable end result, with few learning benefits for the student since feedback from the assessment cannot be used to correct and enhance the learning process (which has ended, at least for that iteration). Recursive feedback, on the other hand, is designed to provide ongoing feedback that learners can use throughout the learning activity to revise their understandings and knowledge products.

The phrase "recursive feedback" itself is not yet commonly used in education. The concept of recursive feedback is used in other fields, primarily mathematics and computing/artificial intelligence, but also by analogy to more humanistic pursuits like digital-human creative synergy. Perhaps especially relevant is the Agile software development model, in which "requirements and solutions evolve through collaboration between self-organizing, cross-functional teams" and which emphasizes adaptive planning, evolutionary development, continuous improvement and a flexible response to change. In each of these fields, recursive feedback refers to a feedback system in which new information about an endeavor is applied to enhance further iterations of that activity in an ongoing (recursive) cycle.

While similar ideas about feedback and assessment (feedback spirals, formative assessment, synergistic assessment, etc.) are becoming widespread in education, the term "recursive feedback" is just beginning to be adopted in educational contexts (see Cope, below). However, it is a very useful concept to adopt as it stresses the continual, reinforcing nature of a consistent feedback process, with intrinsic value assigned to students' metacognitive growth as well as acquisition and assessment of knowledge and skills.

Bill Cope discusses recursive feedback as part of the New Learning ecology.

Bill Cope defines recursive feedback as one of the critical e-learning affordances of the New Learning ecology. In this video, he argues that it is similar to formative assessment, in that it provides feedback for learning rather than feedback of learning. That is, it is information provided to a learner to help them to improve their learning.

Formative assessment is generally considered to be part of a defined learning process of a particular skill or definable segment of information, often used in conjunction with a summative assessment strategy at the end of the learning process to assess the student's final take-away learning of concepts.

Like formative assessment, recursive feedback is meant to help the process of learning, to help the learner figure out what they know and don't yet know, but also how well they are communicating that knowledge. At the same time, I would argue that recursive feedback can also have a much broader connotation of ongoing feedback from multiple sources and perspectives, and that it can be considered separately from "assessment" strategies as in itself a learning strategy.

The concept of recursive feedback is flexible, and could simply denote a single iteration of feedback among a learner and a teacher in a particular knowledge endeavor, where the teacher gives the learner feedback about his or her progress in the learning activity and the learner is able to incorporate that feedback in an improved response or project (Cope 2014). This process can be repeated until the learner is comfortable with the knowledge and has successfully completed the particular learning project.

However, recursive feedback can be used far more powerfully as an ongoing feedback system. Costa and Kallick (1995) theorize a more complex feedback process, which they call a feedback spiral rather than a feedback loop, since the student does not at the end of the process simply end up back at the beginning, but in a new, more advanced and self-aware and self-motivated place. In this conception, illustrated below, the learner decides on his or her goals and purposes, plans the learning activity, and then conducts the experiment or writes a draft or paints or works a problem, etc. The learner then gathers evidence (feedback) from his/her teacher, peers, and his or her own evaluation of the product, and then reflects on that feedback, using it to modify actions in the next iteration or draft, and then to revisit and clarify the goals and purposes of the knowledge endeavor. This spiral continues, perhaps with the inclusion of other audiences to provide feedback (experts, online participants or observers, the school or wider community). Incidentally, Costa and Kallick apply this feedback spiral process not just to students, but to teachers and to organizations as well.

Costa and Kallick's Conception of Feedback Spirals as Components of Continued Learning

What is critical here is that the feedback is coming in from multiple directions in multiple stages, over not just a single project or learning endeavor but as part of larger, ongoing cognitive and metacognitive processes. When recursive feedback is integrated into the learning ecology of the school, learners can focus on the process of learning and of judging and integrating feedback as they grow in expertise in a variety of arenas, rather than focusing on the processes of assessment (which typically take place once learning is to have "ended" as a proof of what they have taken on board). The metacognitive understandings a learner takes from the feedback spiral in one intellectual endeavor will illuminate her next undertaking, each loop of the spiral reinforcing and enriching the others.

The involvement of learners in providing feedback to their peers is a critical component of successful recursive feedback. As Hounsell catalogues, the literature on formative assessment is replete with advocacy for student involvement in feedback processes:

Indeed, for most of those working in this field, an active and substantial feedback role for students is seen as indispensable if higher-quality learning outcomes are to be achieved. For Askew (2000), the conceptual frame of reference is constructivist theories of learning, in which the making of meaning rests primarily with the student, and where feedback needs to engage both teacher and students in a reflexive, collaborative dialogue. For Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick (2006), on the other hand, it is self-regulation in learning which provides the conceptual cornerstone to a set of principles of good feedback practice. The capacity of students to self-regulate--to monitor, direct and prioritise their learning activities---can be powerfully facilitated through well-designed feedback and formative assessment, and can empower students to generate their own internal feedback more effectively. (Hounsell 2007)

Peer editing, from Jessica Garris' EDM310 Blog at http://garrisjessicaedm310.blogspot.com/

Yeager and Walton's work on the effect of social-psychological interventions on disadvantaged learners has great bearing here. They found that single interventions that are embedded in structure of recursive feedback have long-lasting effects in raising student achievement. Their research and analysis of the research of others confirms that an intervention that is not followed by a supportive framework of recursive feedback that reinforces the original message motivating and supporting student learning will not be effective; that is, that it is the feedback spiral that plays the major role in supporting student feelings of self-worth and accomplishment.

How then do psychological interventions generate long-lasting benefits? They do so by setting into motion recursive social, psychological, and intellectual processes in school. As students study and learn and build academic skills and knowledge, they are better prepared to learn and perform well in the future. As students feel more secure in their belonging in school and form better relationships with peers and teachers, these become sources of support hat promote feelings of belonging and academic success later. When students achieve success beyond what they thought possible, their beliefs about their potential may change, leading them to invest themselves more in school, further improving performance and reinforcing their belief in their potential for growth.(Yeager and Walton, 2011)

If recursive feedback on accomplishment can reinforce an early social-psychological intervention to raise self-esteem and increase feelings of potential, recursive feedback that in itself strengthens learners' ability to do higher level work and to see themselves as productive knowledge makers is likely to further reinforce learners' performance and positive attitudes toward their own potential.

However, recursive feedback is even a broader concept than this. At the same time that it denotes the feedback received and internalized by the student from the teacher, for example, it also denotes the reflection of that process: the feedback that the teacher receives from the student's understanding and responses at any stage, that can then be integrated into the teacher's next guiding approach. That is, good teaching is also an outcome of recursive feedback, as the teacher adapts to the successful or not-so-successful attempts of the learner to demonstrate their understanding of a concept. (Okita and Schwartz 2013) Similarly, peers who give feedback also benefit from a connected recursive feedback spiral as they assess how their feedback has been helpful or not, incorporated or not. This feedback helps them to redesign the ways in which they give feedback themselves and the ways in which they process feedback from others. Learners gain in empathy and in critical analysis from being in the position of teacher/guide, and gain access to new paths of understanding from seeing how their feedback impacts others intellectually and emotionally.

In order for this recursive feedback process to be most productive, it should be an explicit part of the learning environment, a skill and a mindset that is consciously modeled and reinforced. Secondly, feedback should be given according to a stable and clear rubric for each learning endeavor, so that both learners and teacher share an understanding of the goals and mileposts of a particular activity. It's also important, as Cope (2014) points out, that the feedback be available throughout the learning process. 

When recursive feedback is used systematically as part of the educational ecology of a school or classroom, the feedback spiral becomes self-reinforcing. Learners not only get better at producing knowledge, they get better at giving and receiving feedback, creating a dynamic, interdependent spiral with other learners and the teacher. Brain-based research on learning makes it clear that this effect is biological, not just intellectual or social, and suggests some clear pathways to integrating recursive feedback effectively.

Make Feedback Varied and Ongoing

Brain-based research has shown that feedback is one of the most critical elements in learning. As Eric Jenssen of Brain-Based Education puts it,

To become effective, the brain relies on an exquisite collection of feedback processors....It is the feedback on our experiences that help us correct our senses, thoughts, and behaviors. Learning which action leads to the most beneficial outcome in a given situation is one of the central components of adaptive behavior....This leads us to why the classroom factor that has the greatest impact on classroom achievement is (drum roll please)… feedback (Hattie, 2009)....In fact, the factor that has the greatest effect on student achievement is on-going feedback. (Jenssen 2011)

Jenssen even suggests that it is better to use lower-quality, less detailed feedback from a variety of activities and sources constantly than to give students more detailed feedback weekly or monthly. He suggests a wide variety of feedback mechanisms: gallery walks, building physical models, games with competition, author's chair, small-group discussion, audio or video feedback, peer editing, student presentations, hypothesis building and testing, using checklists and rubrics, brainstorming, etc. While Jenssen's focus is mostly on feedback to the student by the teacher, peer-to-peer feedback has been shown to be a very effective feedback strategy, and effectively broadens the feedback vectors even further. 

In a technology-enhanced learning environment, feedback might be machine-mediated human feedback, which can make the feedback process quicker and more efficient. This could be anything from a natural language processor assessment of a piece of writing or a class wiki in which peers make comments on a learner's contribution. It might also be delivered in a gaming scenario. Whether a particular iteration of feedback is machine-mediated or direct human feedback, it should be consciously integrated into the cognitive and metacognitive learning processes.

Apply Lessons from Video Gaming

Judy Willis, neurologist and educator, argues that one major reason that video gaming can be an effective element of a learning and assessment strategy is related to recursive feedback, and the repeated release of the "pleasure" neurotransmitter dopamine when certain triggers are effected. Dopamine is released into the body only when gaming players have to struggle to attain a correct response, and they have to then have immediate feedback that they have succeeded in solving a problem:

In a sequential, multilevel video game, feedback of progress is often ongoing, such as accumulating points, visual tokens, or celebratory sound effects, but the real jolt of dopamine reward is in response to the player achieving the challenge, solution, sequence, etc. needed to progress to the next and more challenging level of the game. When the brain receives that feedback that this progress has been made, it reinforces the networks used to succeed. Through a feedback system, that neuronal circuit becomes stronger and more durable....

It may seem counter intuitive to think that children would consider harder work a reward for doing well on a homework problem, test, or physical skill to which they devoted considerable physical or mental energy. Yet, that is just what the video playing brain seeks after experiencing the pleasure of reaching a higher level in the game. A computer game doesn't hand out cash, toys, or even hugs. The motivation to persevere is the brain seeking another surge of dopamine -- the fuel of intrinsic reinforcement. (Willis 2011)

While of course this kind of feedback can be obtained through actually incorporating video gaming related to the curriculum or to particular kinds of problem-solving, the lessons learned from the dopamine response to video gaming can also be applied in other feedback situations. If authentic positive feedback by either the teacher or peers is given immediately upon the solution of a problem or accomplishment of a goal, the self-reinforcing dopamine release is likely to be triggered. If this positive feedback happens as part of a recursive feedback process, the learner is likely to continue to strive harder to achieve the pleasurable feelings associated with cognitive success, and, in addition, to achieve the emotional social rewards of being recognized by the group for success.

Recursive feedback is not an particular feedback activity, but instead an overarching strategy of continual formative assessment, preferably with the concious engagement of the learners. A wide variety of feedback structures are not only possible, but in fact optimal, and these of course will vary depending on the age of the learners, the knowledge area under consideration, and the teacher's and learners' choices. Most important is to have an ongoing, explicit and conscious attention to feedback and revision as a set of metacognitive skills, rather than merely as means to a particular learning goal. 

Fostering a learning ecology in which recursive feedback takes place consistently requires both time and building expertise on the part of teacher and learners. In their article "The Power of Feedback," Hattie and Timperly argue that in order to reap the many cognitive benefits of recursive feedback, a significant investment in changing the learning ecology of the classroom needs to be made.

It should be clear that providing and receiving feedback requires much skill by students and educators. The model advanced in this article does not merely invoke a stimulus-and-response routine but requires high proficiency in developing a classroom climate, the ability to deal with the complexities of multiple judgments, and deep understandings of the subject matter to be ready to provide feedback about tasks or the relationships between ideas, willingness to encourage self-regulation, and having exquisite timing to provide feedback before frustration sets in. (Hattie and Timperly, 2007)

One of the major challenges of moving to a system of recursive feedback is that it would arguably work much better if applied consistently throughout a learner's educational career, rather than as a one-off strategy in a particular classroom. A learner is far less likely to work to learn and incorporate strategies of giving feedback to peers and him or herself if the expectation of doing so is limited in time and place to a single class. Instead, teachers throughout the school or school system should integrate this approach so that students become better and better at these processes over time. This systemic approach is of course quite a challenge in a decentralized system. It will require more systemic adoption (which is likely to come only after further research proves its value through long-term data collection), and then will need significant investment of time by teachers both in professional development and in ongoing intellectual energy and wrok in assessing learners and providing opportunities for self and peer feedback.

Is a commitment to the incorporation of recursive feedback a worthwhile investment, then, of all of this time and energy? At one level, it is simply a more effective means of assessing and reinforcing knowledge-making than summative assessments that only reveal how much a student has learned after the fact. Furthermore, if our goal as educators is to develop self-regulating learners who are motivated to attempt and succeed at cognitive tasks of increasingly complexity and who are proficient in 21st-century skills like collaboration and analysis, recursive feedback seems to be an effective strategy to achieve those goals as well, well worth the time and energy it requries to implement. If more of these finite resource were placed into recursive feedback mechanisms in the classroom rather than on preparing for and giving standardized summative assessments, learners could reap a variety of cognitive, emotional and social benefits.