Vivienne Bozalek Arona Dison

Veronica Mitchell Melanie Alperstein

Giving and Receiving Feedback

Slideshare url: xxxxxx

   

negotiation

to change what students can do…

…reframing the

notion of feedback around the effect on

students

“

Vivienne Bozalek

Arona Dison

Veronica Mitchell

Melanie Alperstein

h#p://www.slideshare.net/2mbuckteeth/the-­‐changing-­‐face-­‐of-­‐digital-­‐learning  

For learners to be: More self-directed More reliant on feedback from peers More inclined to collaborate More inclined to being their own “nodes of production” Better equipped to capture information

(Caring about) recognising the need

listening to the care receiver ‘asking the right questions’

(Weil, 1973)

Example:

The facilitator gave the participant directive advice about her project,

‘Simply putting the (on-line) tool there will not encourage people to use it.’

However he missed her description of the substantial mediation that had taken place in her intervention.

(caring for) willingness to do something to

meet needs extending responsibility beyond

facilitators to participants

“What would you like your participants to be able to be and to do at the end of the process” ?

“ The purpose of requiring students, who are themselves practicing health professionals and educators to reflect on their learning in the P G Diploma in Health Professional Education, is based on our belief that reflection enables students to develop a deeper understand and apply the content of a course to their own practice. Reflection is considered to be a powerful method of learning. Evidence of the educational value of reflection in becoming a professional is frequented described in the literature. Furthermore, once students have learnt how to reflect and how reflection is assessed an additional outcome would be that they will be able to apply it to their own context and be able to teach their students how to reflect.”

(Melanie’s reflection 1)

(Care giving) Hands on act of giving

feedback: initially facilitators guiding more directly on task;

peers on content

It is not about the technical delivery such as the “formulaic response

such as the feedback sandwhich”

but the emotions and dialogue - before, during and after feedback

Boud and Molloy, 2013

Care receiving by care-giver

exposing vulnerabilities (e.g. what had gone wrong in a project)

feeling safe to ask for help

what participants do with feedback

agency of students/participants

nested tasks to allow for ‘feed forward’

input at different stages to contribute to

final product

Boud and Molloy, 2012, 2013)    

Caring with risk vulnerability honesty

Sharing vulnerability

CHEC short course

educators should consider

using technology to enhance communication

and provide richer, more meaningful platforms for

the social construction of knowledge

Rowe, M., Bozalek, V. & Franz, J. 2013. Using Google Drive to facilitate a blended approach to authentic learning.

Cloud computing

 

“

Talking back in Google Drive

Why Google Drive

?

Collaboration - expanded potential New opportunities / affordances

Online dialogue

Risk?

Giving

How much? Power & hierarchy?

Where will this conversation lead?

Adequate discourse? Judgement?

Empowering

Shared new meanings Co-construction of knowledge

Receiving

Fear, defensiveness Discomfort to expose myself ?

Shifting to teacher role? What impact will my comment

have? Is it good enough?

Participation democratic

Evidence of trust, team effort My voice is valued

Authentic constructivism

Critical friends

shared constructions of knowledge are capable of

providing richer frameworks for the cross-fertilization of ideas

than those provided only by the frame of reference

of the lecturer

Bozalek, V. & Matthews., L. 2009:238. E-Learning: A cress-institutional forum for sharing socio-cultural influences on personal and professional identity. International Social Work 52:2

“

Scaffolding as support

to reposition [feedback] as a

practice that has a positive

and sustained influence on learning

Boud, D. & Molloy, E. 2013:699. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, British Journal of Educational Technology. 38:6:698–712

“

Authentic task Healthy group dynamics Modelling good practices Setting precedence of democratic caring Safe space Enough time for participation Acknowledging conflict and dealing with it

Risk & vulnerability Power and control - authoritarian approach Too knowledgeable Missing or unbalanced elements of care Set in old ways

Challenging assumptions on feedback can be uncomfortable There is a need to wrestle with honest feedback Peer feedback ought to be encouraged

Thank you