Research School Network: Blog: Part 3: Moving Away From Marking Policies: The Principles Behind Effective Feedback The Principles Behind Effective Feedback. A Case Study.

In my last blog I summarised the EEF Guidance Report. In this final blog, I will summarise the methods for giving feedback and then how this altered our feedback policy and further steps.

in summary, the EEF advocates feedback policies which prioritise three key principles above any particular methods – lay the foundations for effective feedback, deliver appropriately timed feedback that focuses on moving learning forward, and plan for how pupils will receive and use feedback.

The report does provide some clarification around different methods for giving feedback (written or verbal), but again reiterates that whichever method is chosen is of secondary concern – adhering to the three above-mentioned principles remains paramount. Essentially, the report recognises that both written and verbal feedback can be effective if it follows high-quality foundations, is timed appropriately and has a clear focus on either the subject, the task or pupil’s self-regulation, and is then used. Equally, both written and verbal feedback can be ineffective if principles 1 – 3 are not followed.

There are two key considerations here. Firstly, if the three principles of effective feedback outlined in the report are followed, and taking everything into account about how pupils will receive feedback the teacher decides it will make little difference whether the feedback is given verbally or in writing, then the impact on workload and significant opportunity cost associated with written feedback cannot be disregarded. There is no specific evidence here to suggest that verbal feedback is any more effective that written (as long as the three principles are followed), but all things being equal, one is obviously much more time-efficient for teachers. Hornets and butterflies.

However, the second point to understand is that schools who have moved to an exclusively ​“no marking policy”, instead of a ​“feedback policy” are also not entirely in line with what the EEF recommends. Remembering that it is essential to understand and plan for how each individual pupil might best respond to feedback means to know which children will benefit from a written comment more than a verbal one, and which students will not respond to whole-class feedback systems, either because they will simply assume the information is not relevant to them, or because they will take the generality of the feedback to mean that it does not apply to their own work. These pupils obviously need feedback given individually, or at the very least in a small group where the teacher can be more specific. Therefore, senior leaders should be mindful that the EEF guidance does not call for absolute no-marking policies, not does it specifically advocate whole-class feedback policies. Once again, rather than articulating any precise method, feedback policies should prioritise the three principles and leave the implementation of feedback in the hands of those who know the pupils best – the teaching staff.

As a result, when writing our own new feedback policy, we were mindful that we were placing a huge onus on our staff to make their own informed decisions, and there was no consistent approach to feedback that we were going to insist upon in every classroom or subject.

We are aware that there exists a myriad of things for our staff to consider before each instance of giving feedback: 1. When to give feedback? Immediate feedback (at the point of learning), summary feedback (at the end of the lesson/​task) or review feedback (away from the point of teaching)? 2. What to give feedback about? The task, the subject, or the pupil’s self-regulation? 3. Who to give feedback to? Individuals, small groups or whole class? 4. How to give the feedback? Verbally, or in writing?

There is no one-size-fits-all answer to any of these questions, and therefore we have to trust our staff to provide whatever feedback is best and most appropriate for the child at a particular moment. Teachers will consider the motivation of the pupil, their self-confidence, their working memory capacity, their trust in the teacher and the nature of the task or activity. While one pupil might respond best to individual feedback given to them verbally at the point of learning, another might be more receptive to feedback given to a small group of pupils at the end of the lesson alongside a few written reminders or prompts in their book. For other classes and year groups, a whole-class feedback sheet might be the most suitable way to give feedback after certain lessons, but not others, and all of this is fine. The essential point here is that individual teachers are best-placed to gauge what the best approach will be for each individual pupil.

Taking on a feedback policy that is so deliberately lacking in specificity and precision is not without its challenges. There are many things that all stakeholders need to be mindful of, from staff to pupils to parents to external visitors. Different books and work from different pupils, classes, year groups, teachers and subjects will display evidence varying degrees of feedback. Any new feedback policy such as this needs to be carefully communicated to pupils and parents who might still expect to see extended written marking in books.

We have also had to work very hard to communicate the message to our staff that we are reducing workload, not eliminating it. Yes, we are saving time by avoiding unnecessary written feedback, but we are spending much more time considering the best method and timescale for providing feedback depending on the nature of the lesson, the task and the individual pupil, and concentrating much more on making sure our feedback is focussed clearly on the task, subject or pupil’s self-regulation. We were mindful that a few teachers might only hear the ​“no more marking” message and wrongfully presume that the days of ever looking through their pupils’ books and reading their work was over.

Below are some of the key passages from our school’s new feedback policy. As well as clearly drawing heavily on the EEF’s guidance report, there are also various sections borrowed, adapted or just plain and simply copied from two feedback policies very kindly shared publicly online by Michael Tidd and Clare Sealy (links in the further reading section).

Cantrell Primary School’s Feedback Policy (selected passages):

The sole purpose of feedback at our school is to further children’s learning. At Cantrell, we are clear that the focus of feedback must always be on encouraging pupil progress, and it is not to be used for accountability or monitoring purposes.
As such, evidence of feedback is incidental to the process; we do not provide additional evidence for external verification.

We recognise the Education Endowment Foundation’s recommendation that ensuring teacher autonomy to exercise their evidence-informed professional judgement is likely to prove valuable. We understand and endorse the message from the EEF’s report that the principles of effective feedback likely matter more than the methods through which it is delivered. Therefore, our feedback policy deliberately avoids specifying exact methods of delivery or precise timings or frequency for feedback.

The majority of feedback given to pupils at our school is verbal. At Cantrell, we are highly conscious of the workload and opportunity cost associated with lengthy written marking and as a result we suggest our teaching staff use time-efficient methods of feedback to mitigate teacher workload.
On occasions and where it is appropriate, pupils may receive some form of written feedback. This may include drawings, diagrams, symbols, ticks or short written comments. Other indications of written feedback in books may be self-assessment by the child, including a RAG rating of the objective where appropriate, or peer assessment using green pen.

At Cantrell Primary School, feedback typically occurs at one of three common stages in the learning process: immediate feedback (at the point of teaching), summary feedback (at the end of a lesson/​task, or the beginning of the next lesson) and review feedback (away from the point of teaching). At Cantrell, we understand that there is little conclusive evidence regarding the timing of feedback, and that both immediate and delayed feedback may be effective. We therefore encourage the decision on timing of feedback to be left to individual teacher judgement, where teaching staff consider the nature of the task, the individual pupil and the entire class when deciding when to provide feedback.

At Cantrell, we aim for our teaching staff to ensure their feedback is focussed on one of three things: the particular task that a pupil has undertaken; the underlying processes related to a specific subject; or a pupil’s self-regulation. We recognise that feedback is less likely to be effective if it provides a general comment about a pupil’s characteristics.

Task-focussed feedback: for example, telling pupils during an ordering task in maths that two items are the wrong way around and they should revisit the order and try again would be providing effective task-focussed feedback. Less effective (person-focussed) feedback would be to say, ​“I’m surprised you made this mistake – you’re normally so good at maths.”
Subject-focussed feedback: for example, telling pupils during a piece of creative writing that they are using too many short, simple sentences and should try and use a range of conjunctions to expand their sentences would be providing effective subject-focussed feedback. Less effective (vague and general) feedback would be to say, ​“Try and make your writing more interesting.”
Self-regulation-focussed feedback: prompting a pupil to consider why their performance in a recent cricket game was less successful than a previous performance before asking them to use the feedback when practicing would be providing effective self-regulation focussed feedback. Less effective (person-focussed) feedback would be to say, ​“You normally play much better than that!”

Alongside having a clear focus for our feedback, at Cantrell we recognise the huge importance of planning for how pupils will receive and use feedback, using strategies to ensure that pupils will act on the feedback offered. Pupils must be given the opportunities to re-do or re-draft a task, apply subject-specific knowledge and skills to a different task or practice a specific skill in either the same or a different context following feedback.

Less than a year after first introducing this policy in a staff meeting, and after its gradual implementation and embedding over this academic year, it is too early to presume to be able to speak authoritatively in detail about the exact impact the new feedback policy is having. However, there have been some obvious changes – teachers still spend time after school looking at books, but significantly less time, and the impact on workload has been noticeable. Staff morale around assessment and feedback is undoubtedly higher, and happier staff make for a more effective and successful school.

With a tighter focus for feedback moving learning forward, we have seen across the school that pupils have made good progress this year. This is reflected not only in pupils’ books when we have conducted curriculum reviews, but also in our end of year assessments in all year groups. Our KS2 SATs results at the end of 2021 – 22 were the best we have had in over a decade, and while it would of course be inaccurate to suggest that this was a direct result of not marking books, the change to a feedback policy has clearly done nothing to hinder the progress of pupils this year.

Our main challenge as a leadership team has been relinquishing the control that a marking policy gives you, and putting our trust entirely in the teaching staff to implement our feedback policy. How do we know that teachers are reading their pupils’ work regularly? How do we know that in lessons teachers are thinking carefully about when and how to give feedback? To a large extent, we don’t, and that can be an unnerving state of affairs.

We have provided lots of reminders and regular updates for our staff around feedback at staff meetings and INSET days, sharing examples of what effective feedback looks like, alongside examples of things to avoid. We need to continue to look closely at those individual pupils who are not making progress and try to understand why feedback is not working so successfully for them. We need to make sure we spend time in lessons so that we can get a clearer understanding of which staff are confident and effective with giving feedback in line with our new policy, and who needs more support.

The proof, ultimately, is in the pudding, and as we can see pupils are in general continuing to make good progress and know more and remember more, while staff are simultaneously happier about their workload and clearer about how they can help their pupils improve, then we can be reasonably confident that the transition from marking policy to feedback policy appears to have been a successful one.

Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning | EEF (educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk)

Marking is a hornet | Joe Kirby (wordpress.com) – Joe Kirby

How do bad ideas about assessment lead to workload problems? – Daisy Christodoulou

The New No Marking Policy In Our Primary School And How To Create Your Own (thirdspacelearning.com) – Clare Sealey

A policy for feedback, not marking | Ramblings of a Teacher (wordpress.com) – Michael Tidd

Giving feedback the ​‘Michaela’ way | Reading all the Books – Jo Facer

No Written Marking. Job Done. – onebetweentwo (weebly.com) – Andrew Percival

Feedback not marking – The Educational Imposters (wordpress.com)