HOW FUTURE PEDAGOGUES (PEDAGOGY STUDENTS) UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOOD FEEDBACK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2023vol1.7149Keywords:
feedback, feedback types, future pedagogues (pedagogy students)Abstract
The aim of this article is to reveal what is good feedback in the opinion of future teachers (pedagogy students). The topic received a lot of attention in the scientific literature due to the training process being carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was researched which form of feedback is better. However, a few studies have been made on how pedagogy students understand what constitutes good feedback. 23 students of pedagogy who are future teachers in schools or kindergartens participated in the research for this paper. The data was collected in January-March, 2021. This is a qualitative study, based on the methodological approaches of social constructivism.
When analyzing the peculiarities of good feedback identified by pedagogy students, we can distinguish the following subcategories: creating a pleasant, safe and benevolent environment; positive effects; helping or encouraging self-assessment; clear feedback; other observations. Future educators, when talking about good feedback, paid attention to the emotional, benevolent environment being created during the feedback; methodological aspects of providing feedback (clear recommendations for improvement, encouraging self-assessment), but did not mention the appropriate choice of the type of feedback at all.
Downloads
References
Bozorgian, H., Yazdani, A. (2021). Direct Written Corrective Feedback with Metalinguistic Explanation: Investigating Language Analytic Ability. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 1, 65-85. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1282285
Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give to your students effective feedback. Alexandria: ASCD.
Cefai, C. D., & Cavioni, P. V. (2021). A formative, inclusive, whole school approach to the assessment of social and emotional education in the EU. NESET report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. DOI: 10.2766/506737
Chaudhary, A. (2022). The Efficacy of Continuous Corrective Feedback on Writings of Saudi EFL Students. Arab World English Journal, 13(4), 386 -397. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol13no4.25
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks (Calif.). London: SAGE Publications.
Dahlgren, L. O., & Fallsberg. M. (1991). Phenomenography as a qualitative approach in social pharmacy research. Journal of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Vol. 8 (4), p. 150–156.
Garber, P. R. (2014). Giving and receiving performance feedback. Amherst: HRD Press.
Hast, M. (2021). Higher Education in Times of COVID-19: Giving online Feedback Implementation Another Look. Higher Education Studies, 11, 1-7. Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7fe0/4d73efa8d3852068433b2431ac60bc302d06.pdf
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research March, 77, 81-112.
Indrašienė, V., & Žibėnienė, G. (2014). Pasiekimų vertinimas ir įsivertinimas. Vilnius: MRU.
Knaut, J., Altieri, M., Bach, S., Strobl, I., & Dechant, K. (2022). A Theory-Based Approach of Feedback in STACK-Based Moodle Quizzes Taking into Account Self-Regulation and Different Proficiency of Learners. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 17(23), pp. 38–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v17i23.36425
Kukla, A. (2000). Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science. New York: Routledge.
Miller, T., Birch, M., Mauthner, M., & Jessop, J. (2012). Ethics in Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Ozkale, U., & Kanadh, S. (2021). An Investigation of Feedback Strategies Used by Science Teachers in the Classroom Setting: A Mixed-Methods Research. International Journal of Progressive Education, 1, 439-457. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1286326
Penn, S., & Nicola, B. (2022). Screencast Feedback Better Than Text Feedback for Student Learning in Higher Education? A Systematic Review. Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal, 15 (2), 1-18. DOI: 10.18848/1835-9795/CGP/v15i02/1-18
Siarova, H., Sternadel, D., & Mašidlauskaitė, R. (2017). Assessment practices for 21st century learning: review of evidence. NESET II report, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. DOI: 10.2766/71491
Thi, N. K., & Nikolov, M. (2022). How Teacher and Grammarly Feedback Complement One Another in Myanmar EFL Students’ Writing. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.), 31(6), p. 767-779. DOI: 10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2
