Challenging feedback myths: Values, learner involvement and promoting effects beyond the immediate task

Author(s)
Molloy, E
Ajjawi, R
Bearman, M
Noble, C
Rudland, J
Ryan, A
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2019
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Context:
Research suggests that feedback in the health professions is less useful than we would like. In this paper, we argue that feedback has become reliant on myths that perpetuate unproductive rituals. Feedback often resembles a discrete episode of an educator “telling,” rather than an active and iterative involvement of the learner in a future‐facing process. With this orientation towards past events, it is not surprising that learners become defensive or disengaged when they are reminded of their deficits.
Methods:
We tackle three myths of feedback: (a) feedback needs praise‐criticism balancing rules; (b) feedback ...
View more >Context: Research suggests that feedback in the health professions is less useful than we would like. In this paper, we argue that feedback has become reliant on myths that perpetuate unproductive rituals. Feedback often resembles a discrete episode of an educator “telling,” rather than an active and iterative involvement of the learner in a future‐facing process. With this orientation towards past events, it is not surprising that learners become defensive or disengaged when they are reminded of their deficits. Methods: We tackle three myths of feedback: (a) feedback needs praise‐criticism balancing rules; (b) feedback is a skill residing within the teacher; and (c) feedback is an input only. For each myth we provide a reframing with supporting examples from the literature. Conclusions: Equipping learners to engage in feedback processes may reduce the emotional burden on both parties, rendering techniques such as the feedback sandwich redundant. We also highlight the benefits for learners and teachers of conceptualising feedback as a relational activity, and of tracing the effects of information exchanges. These effects may be immediate or latent, and may manifest in different forms such as changes in learner evaluative judgement or professional identity.
View less >
View more >Context: Research suggests that feedback in the health professions is less useful than we would like. In this paper, we argue that feedback has become reliant on myths that perpetuate unproductive rituals. Feedback often resembles a discrete episode of an educator “telling,” rather than an active and iterative involvement of the learner in a future‐facing process. With this orientation towards past events, it is not surprising that learners become defensive or disengaged when they are reminded of their deficits. Methods: We tackle three myths of feedback: (a) feedback needs praise‐criticism balancing rules; (b) feedback is a skill residing within the teacher; and (c) feedback is an input only. For each myth we provide a reframing with supporting examples from the literature. Conclusions: Equipping learners to engage in feedback processes may reduce the emotional burden on both parties, rendering techniques such as the feedback sandwich redundant. We also highlight the benefits for learners and teachers of conceptualising feedback as a relational activity, and of tracing the effects of information exchanges. These effects may be immediate or latent, and may manifest in different forms such as changes in learner evaluative judgement or professional identity.
View less >
Journal Title
Medical Education
Note
This publication has been entered into Griffith Research Online as an Advanced Online Version.
Subject
Biomedical and clinical sciences
Education
Specialist studies in education
Psychology