Research School Network: We’re Talking About Feedback – Recommendation 4! Recommendation four – Carefully consider how to use purposeful, and time-efficient, written feedback.

Blog


We’re Talking About Feedback – Recommendation 4!

Recommendation four – Carefully consider how to use purposeful, and time-efficient, written feedback.

by Staffordshire Research School
on the

Rather than thinking about feedback as an isolated event, this report makes it clear that feedback is likely to be more effective if it is approached systematically.’

Dylan William

With this in mind, the shift in thinking around the need for quality FEEDBACK (as opposed to marking), is that feedback is increasingly seen as an integral part of a teacher’s toolkit to move learning forward. Not only this, feedback, if used well, is a powerful tool for supporting students to self-regulate and increasingly manage their own work, improvement and learning.

Both feedback and metacognition/​self-regulated learning feature highly in the EEF’s Teaching and Learning Toolkit and as such should be embraced and pursued as powerful learning tools and not bolt-ons’. Indeed, these two strands show strong impact for low cost and are based on extensive research.

Slide1
Feedback has a high impact for low cost based on extensive research
Slide2
Metacognition and self-regulation strategies have a high impact for low cost based on extensive research

So, what is the issue?


The issue, as evidenced via multiple teacher surveys, including Teacher Tapp, is that schools have traditionally put their focus on marking in the written form as opposed to giving feedback in a way which pays heed to the previous three recommendations in their design: that is 1) Laying the foundations; 2) Delivering appropriately timed feedback that moves learning forward and 3) Planning for HOW pupils will receive and USE the feedback.

Traditionally, school leaders have focused on prescribing the amount of written marking and the frequency with which it should be completed, rather than, as the report suggests, allowing teachers the freedom to select the methods by which they feedback and the frequency with which it is needed. So long as the three earlier recommendations are fully embedded as principles within any policy around the use of written feedback, these guiding principles should be enough.

In the report compiled by the Independent Teacher Workload Review Group in 2016, it states:

Marking should serve a single purpose – to advance pupil progress and outcomes. Teachers should be clear about what they are trying to achieve and the best way of achieving it.’

The report continues:

Crucially, the most important person in deciding what is appropriate is the teacher.’

Therefore, our policies around marking’ or feedback’ must have these principles around autonomy and professionalism at its heart.

What about monitoring adherence to…


In terms of accountability then, the metrics shouldn’t be based around whether some arbitrary frequency indicator is met. We instead can evaluate the degree to which the principles are being engaged with through a quality professional conversation with colleagues.

Some possible questions for line managers to use to test depth of understanding (and commitment to) the principles of a feedback policy are captured below and are based on the three earlier recommendations in the report. These questions are also useful prompts for us to reflect on ourselves.

Rec 1 q
Example questions to support our understanding and commitment to recommendation 1
Slide4
Example questions to support our understanding and commitment to recommendation 2
Slide5
Example questions to support our understanding and commitment to recommendation 3

If we consider these sorts of questions individually, collectively or as part of a line management conversation periodically, we will be deepening our own understanding of the principles which should underpin any policy around feedback.

The guidance report gives several ideas and case studies for how we can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our written feedback and these are worth developing both at individual and department level. See the Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning guidance report for more information.

Two examples are given below:

Live marking


This method may well save teachers time, although teachers should still ensure that the feedback given is thoughtful and purposeful (rather than just adding the teacher’s pen to books for the sake of it) and that pupils are provided with opportunities to use it. The approach may also allow for additional verbal interaction with pupils, which may support the understanding of feedback.

Coded marking


Using the shared understanding of the concept of quality’ that teachers have devised for a task, a teacher can design (or develop in consultation with their pupils) a number of codes which they can use to mark pupils’ work.

Slide6
An example of coded marking for History

The teacher could add these codes in the margin where these elements are present (or lacking) and then prompt pupils to review their work. If you devise a coding system which works across multiple pieces of work, students can be guided to review and compare their previous performance in relation certain elements and chart their progress.

Further reading:

Higgins, S., Kokotsaki, D. and Coe, R., 2012. The teaching and learning toolkit. Education Endowment Foundation and Sutton Trust.

Collin, J. and Quigley, A., 2021. Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning. Guidance Report. Education Endowment Foundation.

Higton, J., Leonardi, S., Richards, N., Choudhoury, A., Sofroniou, N. and Owen, D., 2017. Teacher workload survey, 2016.

SJO bio

More from the Staffordshire Research School

Show all news

This website collects a number of cookies from its users for improving your overall experience of the site.Read more