• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

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

    Thumbnail
    Author(s)
    Molloy, E
    Ajjawi, R
    Bearman, M
    Noble, C
    Rudland, J
    Ryan, A
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Noble, Christy H.
    Year published
    2019
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    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 >
    Journal Title
    Medical Education
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13802
    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
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/387491
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E
    • TEQSA: PRV12076

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander