This reflection on the role of feedback in education is based on a mailing list discussion as part of the SAFRI programme, as well as on a few of the assigned readings. I thank the organisers of the session, as well as all the participants in the conversation.
The assigned readings seem to focus on providing readers with a list of guidelines for providing effective feedback and while this list is not exhaustive, it serves as a starting point. Feedback is better when:
I'm glad someone pointed out that this (long) list is wonderful in ideal situations but is impractical in many real-world situation, which is where we find ourselves most often e.g. large student:teacher ratios, overloaded faculty and limited time to spend with students. On further reflection, it seems clear that this issue is not specific to feedback, and affects almost everything we want to do as teachers. The problem with teaching is that the way we want to do it (i.e. small groups with focused attention) doesn't scale very well and we need to come up with a fundamentally different approach to teaching. My own view is that the internet and various associated technologies can enhance communication in ways that do scale, and that therein lies part of the solution.
Arriving at a consensual definition of feedback is difficult since everyone has their own idea of what is is (and what it should be). We can however, think of feedback in the following conceptions; as information, as reaction, and as a cycle that includes information and reaction.4)
My own initial thought on a list of guidelines was that it was a wonderful “how to” for providing effective feedback to students. However, as I progressed through the conversation, I began to have my doubts, starting with this one. I worry that having a list of guidelines may deceive us into thinking that if we follow the list then we've given good feedback. This is like a student thinking that following a list of questions is a good way to conduct an assessment. Giving feedback seems to be a dynamic process, affected by context (e.g. social / cultural background, type of placement / task) and an understanding of the person/ality receiving it. Someone suggested that the complex process of giving / receiving feedback was also about the identity and character of the receiver and that ”…in order to protect the integrity of their beliefs and knowledge, [they] will reject corrective feedback and find ways to devalue it”. Hewson & Little (1998) identified the importance of eliciting thoughts and feelings before giving feedback, which might go some way to alleviating this.5)
One of the participants insightfully related this back to the MBTI session in March, where it was clear that “knowledge of personalities is useful when giving and receiving feedback. What we know about ourselves and others is important feedback management”. In relation to this, another participant raised the point that ”…the issues of culture, gender, religion, belief, age are very important in feedback. Also, feedback for average students is different than feedback for failing students [as well as for] students who think they're doing well [but] are actually failing”. I think it's important to note that feedback is dynamic, contextual and complex.
I found a common theme in the conversation that went along the lines of “feedback drives learning”. This may be a matter of semantics but I'd like to challenge the idea that it does drive learning and suggest that it can drive learning. This may seem pedantic but I think it's important, because when we say (or imply) that it does, we're operating under the assumption that all feedback is equal, which it clearly isn't. This was pointed out by several participants, who suggested that feedback can be inappropriate ”…because of how, when or where it is presented”. Some teachers seem to be guilty of using feedback to highlight their own skills and knowledge, while at the same time making it clear that the student lacks these things (or in one horrifying example, actively humiliating them).
When using my own experiences to make a point, I often include examples of my mistakes. I think that as role models, we need to model our failures (and to elaborate on how we moved past them) as well as our successes. Students seem to have an idea that we're infallible, which unfortunately makes them believe they must be too. If we can highlight that we're also subject to errors of judgement and prone to forgetfulness (a big one for me), we show them that we're human and go a long way to establishing trust.
There was a suggestion that giving “feedback is a skill that has to be learnt” and that we should emphasise its importance. This was taken further with the idea that receiving feedback is also a skill that needs to be learnt (e.g. listening, reflecting, analysing), and that we need to spend a lot more time preparing students to receive feedback effectively and with the right attitude / mindset. One participant spoke of students who receive feedback defensively, negating it whether it was appropriate or not. I liked the idea raised that feedback should not only emphasise knowledge, but also more generic skills like effective communication, conflict resolution, etc.
Some respondents mentioned “trying to find positive things to say”. First of all, it doesn't make sense to talk about “positive” and “negative” if you believe that all feedback is given in a positive spirit. The idea that “negative” feedback is about what the student did wrong just adds to the perception that feedback is either good or bad. Why can't all feedback just be feedback? You're reporting on what you think the student can do to improve their work, or you're justifying a mark you gave. I can only speak for myself when I say that I don't try to find positive things to say, just like I don't try to find negative things to say. I say what I see / read.
It was pointed out that feedback is not only about a student-teacher interaction, it can also be between peers or colleagues. In fact, feedback is ”…for helping all who are interested in self development and actualization of goals, not only students”. This suggests to me that feedback between peers could be an important component of peer teaching 6)7) and learning by teaching, an area of that I'm increasingly interested in.
Feedback should also be given to students who are performing well. This will help to dispel the notion that feedback = criticism. It was pointed out that as teachers, we often have a tendency to focus on the student's weakness (I know that I'm guilty of this), possibly as a remnant of our own experiences of being students, when this is how we received it. One of the dangers of focusing on the negative only, is inducing a lack of confidence on the students part, where they become incapable of identifying their strengths. Thus, feedback should be used to highlight strengths as well as weaknesses, in order to promote learning.
Some participants found that the process of providing feedback to a colleague could be a learning experience for them, as well as receiving feedback from colleagues.
I liked the suggestion that as faculty we have the opportunity to change our teaching practices based on feedback we receive from our students. In my department, we are required to conduct module evaluations at the end of each module we teach, for the purposes of using it to inform our teaching. However, for various (perfectly valid) reasons, many of us struggle to do these evaluations with the regularity that we should, and even fewer act on the feedback. This year we're piloting the use of Forms in Google Docs to conduct the surveys among students. Staff can modify a standard template so that it suits their needs, and then email the link to the class. This removes the need for data capture and analysis and presents the lecturer with a neat output of the results. Of course, following up on them and changing ones practice is an entirely different matter.
Before beginning, see the third point in the guidelines. All too often (as was pointed out by some participants), feedback = marks, and there is no action required after receiving the mark (or if there is, the response is along the lines of “What must I do to get a higher mark”). I wonder if we're not the problem. We make the assumption (and model behavior showing) that feedback and marks are related, whereas they don't need to be. Marks are quantitative, while feedback is qualitative. Marks are summative, feedback is formative. Apples are apples and oranges are oranges. When one person is evaluating another, there's no real objectivity, and so quantitative measures of competence don't seem to me to be a good fit. We should distinguish between formative and summative assessment, and their relative relationships to feedback. In formative assessment, feedback is essential as its nature is to facilitate learning. In summative assessment, feedback is irrelevant because the nature of the examination is to evaluate, which we've seen is not the role of feedback.
I think we need to get away from this idea that feedback and marks are necessarily related. Of course they can be, but it doesn't mean they must be. We have to disconnect feedback, which is about learning, and marking, which is about evaluation (and not a very good form of evaluation at that). If students are “marks driven” it's because we've put marks at the centre of our curricula. How do we de-emphasise marks…well, by not marking (it's radical, I know).
I think that in order to useful, the person providing feedback should be aware of the objectives of the task. The example given was reviewing an abstract for a conference. The content and style of the document would be influenced by whether it's for a poster or an oral presentation, as well as the nature of the conference, the audience, etc. When giving feedback, it's important to take context into account.
Sometimes it may be useful to consider how the feedback is given. For example, one participant suggested that she found a clarifying question to be of more use in the feedback she received, than a simple statement. That's how I try to give feedback. If the point of the feedback is to stimulate reflection and further engagement, a question would seem to be the most appropriate way to do it. However, I also try to provide general comments, especially where they would explain my reasoning behind the mark that was allocated for that section. I always found the marking process a mysterious thing, never quite sure of how my examiner would award marks. When you say, I gave you this mark because of this thing that you said / didn't say, it at least gives the student a starting point for the next version.
In order for feedback to be effective and of any value, we must first identify the relationship between the task, the feedback, reflection on the task and feedback, and finally, acting on the feedback. Without first making sure that the receiver understands this, the feedback is of no value. We know that reflection drives deep learning, understanding and professional development, yet we leave little space in the curriculum for structured reflection (and forget about teaching students how to reflect). It was great to read the comment “we do not learn from experience, but rather from reflecting on experience, and feedback must facilitate this reflection for the student”. I would argue that unless the feedback results in a behavioral change, it is ineffective. Of course, if the student cannot focus on anything but the mark, we clearly haven't established for them the relationship between the task, the feedback, the reflection and the action.
One participant suggested considering feedback as a sharing of ideas, rather than a process of giving and receiving. He compared it to an exchange of commodities. This also speaks to the idea of both parties (or more) learning through the interaction. I've been thinking about things more and more as conversations (“less threatening and more human”, which has helped me with my confidence, especially around the feedback process. If the conversation is approached with everyones' best interests at heart, it's not a negative or positive thing, it's just a thing. Or as was suggested, that it's ”…two people seeking a shared experience for the greater good”.
There was a question of whether “no feedback could also be feedback”, and I agree with one response which stated that it was ”…the most negative and most useless form of 'feedback' in that it borders on pure and simple indifference”, as well as being “regressive and inhibiting”. I'm reminded of a line from ”A man for all seasons”, in which Thomas More states that …“the maxim of the law is 'Silence gives consent'” (on a side note, here are some brilliant quotes from the movie). When I was a student and was not explicitly told to improve (and to do this), then it meant there was nothing to improve, which I found disturbing, knowing what kind of student I was. I worry that if we give no feedback, we risk the student believing that their performance is exemplary (which it may very well be, but then tell them that), or worse, that they don't know what to believe, leading to anxiety and confusion.
I've also been thinking about feedback as a form of literacy, which was touched on by one participant, who suggested that ”…conversation is a form of feedback, a sort of negotiation of understanding in which mutual feedback becomes recursive leading to shared understanding. In this way, feedback is not one person who 'knows' helping another person who doesn't 'know', rather it is mutual. By asking myself questions before and during the feedback, I am learning at the same time the other is learning”. I would take this in a more general direction and suggest that feedback is useless unless the student is at least familiar with the culture of the tribe,8) which includes the language and conventions we use.
We can give as much feedback as we like, but if we're speaking a language the student doesn't understand (I don't mean English, etc.), we're wasting everyone's time. And in case you think that by final year, our students understand our “tribe”, think about this simple example: The first year student is starting out in the culture of higher education, the second year student is starting out in the culture of physiotherapy, the third year student is starting out in the culture clinical practice, and the final year student is starting out in the culture of being a physiotherapist. We need different languages and approaches for each of these different cultures / literacies / “tribes”.
Written feedback is fundamentally different to oral feedback. It lacks the immediacy of a conversation, and therefore cannot rely on the student / receiver to feed off of. The asynchronicity of written feedback does allow the student to review the feedback at a later stage and reflect on it, which would be especially useful when there is a lot of feedback to follow up on.
This made me think about the formats and media we use to give feedback, all the way back to the colour pen we decide to use. For example, red ink has this negative feeling associated with it, that probably goes back to our days in junior school, when red = wrong. Isn't it odd how something can be so ingrained in us all (does anyone from another culture have a different experience?). I've made a conscious decision to avoid using red ink when giving written feedback, as I'm trying to change the mindset around feedback from it being a criticism / negative thing, to a positive experience.
I've been thinking about the possibility of using audio feedback for students.9) 10) 11) This has it's challenges (e.g. distribution, storage and curation / archiving, separation from the artifact) but I believe it may have a place when used in the right context. And students have reported enjoying the experience of receiving feedback in audio form (France & Ribchester, 2008).12)