Learning from students perceptions of feedback
المؤلف:
Mary-Jane Taylor & Coralie McCormack
المصدر:
Enhancing Teaching and Learning through Assessment
الجزء والصفحة:
P58-C6
2025-06-07
729
Learning from students' perceptions of feedback
We report the authors' reflections on the action inquiry to date, in particular, the new insights gained and concerns raised, both of which suggest directions for a future plan-act-reflect cycle (cycle 5).
The outcomes to date of this individual teacher's action inquiry support the suggestion by Piccinin (2003) that "it can be helpful to have a well-developed and well-practiced strategy" for giving feedback. Using plan-act reflect cycles to structure an individual's inquiry into feedback practice focuses attention on each of the three phases (Piccinin, 2003) in giving feedback: the preparation phase (plan), the delivery phase (act), and the follow-up phase (reflect). Often the preparatory and follow-up phases can be neglected if the inquiry is not structured and on-going. That is, the focus is on doing (giving feedback) and the content of the feedback, rather than on the process (plan-act-reflect). Training in the process of giving and receiving feedback could enhance the effectiveness of verbal assessment feedback.
Contextualizing the 'Checklist for Giving Constructive Verbal Feedback' (Table 2) within a particular teaching discipline (in this case graphic design) increased the potential for successful interactions (see (Taylor & McCormack, 2004) for examples of contextualized feedback statements). In contextualizing feedback it is important to remember that one's value system (in this case design values) are communicated in the process of giving feedback.
Feedback takes practice and constant vigilance to be constructive. Just when you think you have 'got it right' (class 1) you can be surprised by students' reception of your feedback (class 2). Constructive negative feedback can be received by students as evaluative, rather than constructive, no matter how much preparation is involved on the part of the giver. The giver of feedback needs to be alert to the possibility of a mismatch between a student's expectation of their grade and the teacher's assigned grade. In this situation particular attention is needed in relation to being specific (item 4), prioritizing feedback (item 5) and focusing on the positive (item 6). The task of delivering constructive feedback is a complex balancing act.
... there is a central paradox that feedback is both important and difficult ... It seems to me that what we supervisors need is a corpus of strategic skills that will allow us to address ... goals of supervision while also meeting affective and relational goals ... feedback is a professional speech event involving multiple goals, the satisfactory resolution of which requires considerable expertise. (Wajnrb, 1993, pp.74-75)
When feedback is pre-recorded and delivered online for receipt by students in a place, and at a time of their choosing, there are both advantages and disadvantages when this mode of delivery is compared to face-to-face delivery. Advantages for the giver of feedback include:
• More time for thoughtful construction of the feedback messages.
• Feedback can be constructed in a personally comfortable environment, at a time convenient for the giver.
• Where there are multiple markers staff can listen to each others' feedback. This can increase the consistency of marking and feedback across classes within a student cohort. Increased consistency in feedback and marking could reduce student uncertainty.
• A 'database' of examples of feedback for different project grades can be built up over time. New tutors can benchmark their grading by listening to the feedback while viewing the student project (these are normally submitted online). Students too can benefit from viewing examples of a range of projects and increase their understanding of 'good' design elements.
Advantages for the receiver include:
• Students can listen to the feedback more than once.
• Listening can occur at a time, and in a location, of the student's choosing.
• The potential exists for students to reflect on the progress of their own work over time. A student can return to recorded feedback at a later date and reflect on its applicability to a current piece of work. By listening to others' feedback students can reflect on their own work in relation to the work of other students. During class time students often concentrate when receiving their feedback but miss learning opportunities available through listening to the feedback of other students. Such reflective opportunities can assist students to form more accurate perceptions of their abilities and to establish internal standards against which they can evaluate their own design work.
However, in an online verbal feedback context where the feedback is pre-recorded rather than live, and the giver of the feedback cannot see the receiver responding to the feedback, the giver cannot adjust the feedback in response to the receiver's reactions. This mode of delivery seems to require the giver to have a wider design critique vocabulary and a higher level of competency and confidence to use it constructively. Also, the expectation that the online medium for receipt of feedback is available to all students, and is equally reliable for all receivers, may not always be fulfilled.
In summary, quality feedback is concerned with the process, not the end product. So long as the mode of delivery is appropriate, it is not the mode that counts. The process of getting to the final feedback, how you get to the key messages, is what matters.
الاكثر قراءة في Teaching Strategies
اخر الاخبار
اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة
