Using Wise Feedback

October 16, 2025

As instructors, we recognize the value of providing feedback to enhance learning (e.g., we correct misconceptions related to content, help students learn from mistakes following assignment completion, etc.). Yet, rather than seeing our feedback as a way to improve their knowledge and skills, students may perceive feedback differently. For some, they may not understand the relevance of the feedback (e.g., why should I put in the effort to reach a particular standard?). For others, it may reaffirm what they already believe—that they are not capable of doing the work or they do not belong in college. And, for others, it may send the message that they are being judged as incapable by the instructor and wonder why they should even try. So, how can we, as instructors, help students interpret and use our feedback in the ways that we intend (e.g., to enhance their learning)? 

One strategy I have been more intentional in using over the last couple of years is called wise feedback. In a seminal experimental study of the topic, Geoffrey Cohen, Claude Steele, and Lee Ross (1999) found that a wise feedback intervention prompted an increase in motivation and reduced perceptions of bias compared to other types of feedback. They highlighted three main features of wise feedback. 

First, wise feedback states the high expectations and standards associated with the assignment, why the content or skills are important to master, and the importance of challenging oneself in order to grow and learn. While TILTed assignments often have learning goals and expectations, rationale for an assignment, and the grading criteria built in (TILT Higher Ed provides more information about TILT), part of wise feedback is to restate these high expectations explicitly to students. Breana Bayraktar (2021) offers some example statements that teachers can use. 

Second, wise feedback explicitly expresses the belief that students are capable of meeting high expectations through their diligence and appropriate strategy use. That is, send messages about believing in their potential (i.e., enhancing their expectancy) and reminding them to tap into a growth mindset! 

Third, wise feedback provides rigorous and actionable feedback to all students. As Cohen and colleagues document, it is important that feedback highlights how students have missed the mark regarding the expectations set for the assignment and how to improve. This coincides with recent work by Carlton Fong and colleagues (2021), who have reported that undergraduates favorably rated the use of specific instructional feedback intended to help them improve. Therefore, the rigor and construction of the feedback sends the message to students that the instructor wants to support them in achieving the high standards set for the assignment and provides guidance on how to get there. It is also worth repeating this when giving feedback to the students, along with a statement that you believe in their ability to make these improvements on the assignment. 

Regarding this last point, the use of rigorous and actionable feedback also assumes many things, including the three following points. First, students read the feedback provided. Instructors can remind students to review feedback, provide time in class to review feedback, have students complete an assignment or exam wrapper, or set up individual meetings to discuss feedback using the asset-based feedback protocol outlined by Zaretta Hammond. Emily Gravett also offers many more reasons why students struggle with feedback and ways to give feedback in this Teaching Toolbox. Second, rigorous and actionable feedback also assumes that students have the opportunity to demonstrate improvement in knowledge and skills over the course of the semester. For example, assignments are scaffolded, low-stakes assignments are precursors to high-stakes assignments (e.g., quizzes leading to tests or unit tests leading to a comprehensive final exam), mastery grading is incorporated, or the same kind of assignment is given multiple times in a semester (e.g., writing multiple reflection assignments or lab reports). Finally, instructors have to have time to provide rigorous and actionable feedback on assignments. Time is a precious resource, so figuring out how to provide this feedback in a time-efficient way is important. Some suggestions include being strategic about what feedback to offer (i.e., what feedback will result in the greatest learning and growth for students) and creating feedback banks (even in Canvas SpeedGrader) of common pieces of feedback associated with assignments. 

If using wise feedback sounds appealing, there are a few additional considerations to its implementation. First, it is important to make it a regular part of teaching practice; as Cohen and colleagues (1999, p. 1316) note, using wise feedback may be more effective if it is rooted within a course to provide “an empowering pattern of feedback over time.” Another consideration is associated with a recognition of contextual factors within the classroom. For example, Alexandra Troy and colleagues (2024) emphasize the role of the instructor in developing a positive relationship with each student. This can occur by instructors building rapport with students, developing a supportive learning environment, and embedding trauma-informed or healing-centered practices into teaching. The type of environment may influence how students perceive the feedback. It is also worth pondering what is appropriate rigor for the course and sharing with students why the work they are being asked to do for the class is relevant. Finally, wise feedback could be coupled with other so-called wise interventions. In the end, wise feedback may be just the thing to encourage engagement in the classroom and prevent students from becoming discouraged as the semester progresses.