Types and Uses of Feedback

One of the most difficult aspects of face-to-face teaching and learning to replicate in the online environment is engaging feedback. Much like on-stage performers, what and how we "give" is predicated on what we are "getting" from the audience. In the best of teaching there is a constant interplay between the teacher and the taught, and there are even times when those roles are switched. Much of the recent literature in online teaching has sought to explore what constitutes "effective feedback" and the mechanisms for providing it.

Defining Feedback

Source: www.henrybuell.com

According to Sandy Quilligam (2007) effective feedback "involves someone's thoughts on another person's performance that are delivered in a form that enables the recipient to listen to what is being said, receive it constructively, reflect on what has been said and consider how to take action as a result." This constructive element of feedback is echoed by Kulhavy (1977), who points out that "feedback is significantly more effective when it provides details of how to improve the answer, rather than when it just indicates whether the student's work is correct or not." Feedback that is terminal - only indicating right or wrong with no expectation for disagreement or extension - is certainly neither actionable nor an impetus for improvement. Dylan Wiliam (2016) even contends that "most of the time, the student work we are looking at is not important in and of itself, but rather for what it can tell us about the student." This certainly frees feedback from the bounds of the prescriptive mode, as indicated by Quilligan and Kulhavy, and places it in the descriptive frame. Indeed, it even runs counter to the findings of a mega-study by Lorna Kearns in which "instructors believed that feedback to students should be based on specific individual and class performance data with an eye toward improvements in clearly defined instructional objectives (Kearns, L, 2012). In a developmental (and transcendentalist) approach, prompt and detailed feedback helps the student to develop a "critical eye" while also garnering credibility for the teacher in the sense that "the teacher knows what he or she is talking about (Wiliam, 2016).

A surprising study by Pyke and Sherlock (2010) looked at the types and frequency of student feedback in an online course over a full semester. The results confirmed what many suspect - that feedback is weighted heavily (70%) toward "corrective", instructor-to-student communication with "motivational" coming in a distant second at 20%. The authors found that what motivational feedback there was came primarily at the beginning of the semester and then steadily waned. Teams of students were more likely to get corrective feedback. The study suggested that online teachers be more mindful of the proportions of the feedback they provide as well as when it is served up (Pyke & Sherlock, 2010, p. 119).

"My Kingdom for a Horse" (or just some feedback!)

Mechanisms for delivering feedback to students, whatever its definition, vary widely. Jackson & Back (2011) considered role-play as a feedback device while Roter, Larson, Shinitzky, Chernoff & Serwint (2004) looked at video techniques. Peer feedback, which is often used in face-to-face classrooms, translated less effectively to online learning according to a study by Ertmer, et al., (2007). Students were concerned that not all of their classmates could provide quality feedback in a timely manner that was free of bias (Ertmer, et al., 2007, p. 427). Still, while not hanging their hat on its accuracy, students valued peer feedback because it included "confirmation that their ideas were meaningful to others" and afforded them the benefit of "their peers' insights and perspectives"(Ertmer, et al., 2007, p. 427). Jason Huett (2004) touts the use of email for feedback. Citing a 2003 exploration by Selma Vonderwell, Huett posits that email "allows for improved communication and gives students the opportunity to ask more questions of their instructors" while also creating "a sense of anonymity that potentially allows for greater participation by shier students" (Vonderwell, 2003, as cited in Huett, 2004). 

Feedback Mirrors Philosophy

Source: teachonline.asu.edu

My review of some of the research into the types and uses of feedback supports my long held belief that how we define components of teaching and learning and how we use them are firmly rooted in our educational philosophy. If we are steeped in classical notions of education in which the teacher is at the center and knowledge is transmitted rather than constructed, then we are more likely to view feedback as prescriptive and one-directional. In such a philosophy we like our feedback straight, without the base alloy of motivational or critical intent. If, however, we adopt a more constructivist approach in which knowledge is a joint creation of teacher and student, greatly aided and enhanced by Wiliam's "critical eye", then feedback becomes a vital, two-way line of communication. If Pyke and Sherlock are correct, then more attention and study needs to be directed at the types and frequency of the feedback we provide students in both face-to-face and online classes. Only then can we understand its true nature and unlock its vast possibilities.

References 

Ertmer, P., Richardson, J., Belland, B., Camin, D., Connolly, P., Coulthard, G., Lei, K., & Mong, C. (2007). Using peer feedback to enhance the quality of student online postings: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 412-433.  

Huett, J. (2004). Email as an educational feedback tool: Relative advantages and implementation guidelines. Instructional Technology and Distance and Distance Learning, 1(6).

Jackson, V. & Back, A. (2011). Teaching communication skills using role-play: An experience-based guide for educators. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 14(6), 775-780. 

Kearns, L. (2012). Student assessment in online learning: Challenges and effective practices. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 8(3). 

Kulhavy, R. (1977). Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research, ,47(1), 211-232.

Pyke, J. & Sherlock, J. (2010). A closer look at instructor-student feedback online: A case study analysis of types and frequency. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 100-121. 

Quilligan, S. (2007). Communication skills teaching: the challenge of giving effective feedback. Clinical Teacher, 4(2), 100-105. doi:10.1111/j.1743-498X.2007.00154.x.

Roter, D., Larson, S., Shinitzky, H., Chernoff, R., Serwint, J.R., Adamo, G. & Wissow, L. (2004). Use of an innovative video feedback technique to enhance communication skills training. Medical Education, 38(2), 145-157. 

Wiliam, D. (2016). The secret of effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 73(7), 10-15.