Progressive Feedback

It’s about Learning

When feedback is provided regularly in the course (not just for assessments), learners feel supported and guided in their learning.

Progressive focus versus outcome focus

Feedback can be progressive focused i.e. based on student’s thinking before providing answers in assessments (process-oriented feedback). Feedback can be outcome focused i.e. after submission of assessments (outcome-oriented feedback). Not only does process-oriented feedback have a greater positive impact on student performance, it also inspires student learning. Students are better equipped to identify any gaps in their knowledge before they submit an assessment (Gjerde, Padgett & Skinner 2017, p.80).

Strategies for progressive feedback

Communicate, communicate, communicate

  • Explicitly outline the methods you will be using to provide feedback e.g. rubrics for assessments; discussion in class or Canvas for general issues; email/consultation for individual feedback, etc.
  • Encourage questions and work through problems or solutions in class, to help students feel they are not alone in needing clarification.
  • Include activities that require students to provide feedback on each others’ work – and to seek feedback from peers as well as the educator.
  • Provide students with the opportunity to submit an assessment outline or draft for feedback to assist in the preparation of a high-quality final version.
  • Interact with students as they work and provide verbal feedback and guidance.
  • Students do not always perceive the above strategies as feedback therefore be explicit i.e. make the word ‘feedback’ part of your constant vocabulary.
  • Schedule occasional tutorials as ‘feedback tutorials’ i.e. once or twice during semester students receive educator and/or peer feedback on their progress to date.

References

  • Gjerde, KP, Padgett MY & Skinner, DS 2017, ‘The impact of process vs. outcome feedback on student performance and perceptions’, International journal of the academic business world, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 73-82.