I very much enjoyed discussing the article ‘Could do Better?’: students’ critique of written feedback’ by Kate Brooks in the workshop. Here are my main points:
• Students’ Feedback Expectations and Experiences:
The article highlights students’ perceptions of feedback in university Humanities courses, particularly focusing on written feedback on essays. Despite a common desire for “more feedback,” many students fail to engage with the feedback provided. The research discusses what students expect from feedback, how they utilise it, and their overall experiences with it.
• Critique of Written Feedback Content:
In the article students express dissatisfaction with the content of written feedback, highlighting issues such as vagueness, disconnect between comments and grades, and illegibility of handwritten feedback. Effective feedback, according to students, should be clear, focused, and constructive, rather than vague and negative. This resonates with me, as although the feedback in my collaborative Drawing sessions is informal and not part of Assessment, I encourage students to be constructive, focusing on particular aspects of the work e.g. mark making and scale. Students respond better to feedback when I talk to them directly and then open discussion up to the group.
• Impact of Feedback Exchange Methods:
The article discusses how the manner in which feedback is given affects student engagement and learning. Rushed feedback hand-backs, particularly before presentations or without opportunities for discussion, can lead students to feel disengaged and demotivated. The emotional aspect of feedback exchange, akin to studio crits, is relevant as students won’t join in unless they know my Drawing sessions are inclusive.
• Preference for One-to-One Tutorials:
Students express a strong desire for more one-to-one tutorial sessions, finding them valuable for understanding feedback, motivation, and emotional engagement. However, the practicality of offering extensive one-to-one tutorials is questioned due to resource constraints and student reluctance to seek help, which I recognise and mitigate by saying to my Adobe Technical students that they can email me files for comment when they have a question, although I emphasise that I may take a day or two to get back to them!
• Exploration of Alternative Feedback Methods:
The article suggests exploring alternative feedback methods, such as group feedback sessions and peer reviews, inspired by Art and Design practices. These methods could foster a sense of belonging, mutual support, and reflective learning among students. It also advocates for rethinking the role of tutors in feedback sessions towards facilitating peer support and independent learning. This resonates with my method of group feedback and discussion in Collaborative Drawing sessions.
On reflection, I d a quick discussion about giving constructive feedback at the start of my Collaborative Drawing sessions, in the same style as the initial group whiteboard activity around the subject ‘What is Drawing?’ and to take a nuanced approach to feedback, emphasising clarity, engagement, and support for students.
Reference:
Brooks, K. ‘Could do Better?’: students’ critique of written feedback. University of the West of England, Bristol.