Preparing for the session:

My aim for the activity was: To notice our own approach to feedback and compare with peers. To discuss and evaluate different approaches.

‘Noticing’ is a commonly used technique in English language teaching, where students are guided, with more or less structure, to look at material and to observe, or ‘notice’ their own habits, the structure or meaning of a language point, or its register. I feel the cognitive process this involves is really critical to learning and requires very active engagement from students/participants. As quoted in France and Almerode (2022), Schoenfeld states,

Noticing is the active process of attending to what is happening during a learning experience (Schoenfeld, 2011).

I was hoping that by facilitating a structured discussion with space to raise questions, participants might notice their own habits or pre-conceptions about feedback and consider an alternative approach, even if this meant finally reverting to their original approach. It was the focus and interrogation I was interested in, and the noticing of the contextual information that was missing, as being crucial.

I wanted the 20 mins to be primarily used for ‘student’ activity and for peer-to-peer sharing. My main question mark was whether to and how much to offer input or whether I could guide the participants to a point that would be satisfying, and not simply a vague discussion of ideas. Give we had only 20mins, I felt the scope for input was limited. However, I was clear that there would be an output, even in a short time scale.

With regard to object-based learning, I felt that although this was technically using an object to teach, it wasn’t really about the object and therefore I wondered if it was really a true experiment with this technique. My understanding of OBL is that it is more about exploring the physicality of the object, or its context, either cultural or personal, real or imagined. In my micro-teach, I think the object was more of a jumping off point to discuss as aspect of teaching, which in this case was feedback. However, Chatterjee (2010) quoted in Hardie (2015) states,

Objects can be employed in a variety of ways to enhance and disseminate subject-specific knowledge, to facilitate the acquisition of communication, team working, practical, observational and drawing skills, and for inspiration” (p. 180)

I felt that this gave sufficient ‘go-ahead to pursue my idea!

In addition, when I was reading about OBL, there was quite a lot of focus on the student-centred nature of it and this is really my background, or ‘home’ in teaching and certainly the approach I wanted to adopt. Hardie (2015) quotes Biggs (2003), in talking about how students construct their knowledge through their actions. I especially feel affinity with the last line…

Knowledge then is constructed by the students’ learning activities, their approaches to learning. What people construct from a learning encounter depends on their motives and intentions, on what they know already and how they use prior knowledge. Meaning is therefore personal – what the learner has to do is the important thing.(Biggs 2003, p. 13).

Finally, I was taken with Barton and Willcock’s (2017) observation about the communal aspect of learning, when talking about OBL, which I felt reinforced the approach I was taking and in particular, the outcome, which could have taken many different forms. E.g. a series of questions to ask before giving feedback, a ranking of approaches or a single approach.

‘Watching students approach objects from different angles and pool their knowledge to co-produce a new understanding makes manifest Kolb’s assertion that the pursuit of knowledge is a communal activity (1984).

The tasks I chose are shown below. I was careful with the wording to try to ensure that everyone could participate, without any prior knowledge of sculpture. In feedback to each task I also tried not to steer the conversation in a particular way, but to focus on questions and drawing out discussion for the participants to construct their own learning.

Reflections:

In terms of my facilitation and delivery, I was happy with the scaffolding of the activities and the level of discussion. We just about reached the point of coming up with a plan to approach feedback which felt like a reasonable outcome. This is reflected in the picture one the participants took above. The approaches are listed top-bottom in relation to priority. The 90-100% feedback is on the side as one person felt there was a strong place for it and another strongly disagreed.

I think in terms of my aim, based on feedback from the discussions, the participants did consider their own approaches to feedback and how they differed from or were similar to others’. This was also reflected in the feedback I received, with one participant saying it has made her think carefully about how she approaches feedback and to try out something new. I felt we only partially achieved the second part of the aim as we didn’t really get to evaluate the different approaches sufficiently. There was some evaluation, particularly of whether 90-100% feedback was useful and if so, when? I think we could have usefully explored this further to really dig into our preconceptions about where the knowledge lies, and who is doing what in relation to teaching and learning.

I would have liked to have been able to challenge some assumptions more, and push a bit more e.g. re the ‘giving’ feedback – to consider how to do this as questions, or how it might feel to students if they are asked their thoughts and then get the tutor’s ideas anyway. I would have also liked to explore the positive feedback idea more fully as well. E.g. who needs to give the ‘feedback’? Who has the knowledge? How much positive do you actually hear if there is always an equal balance?

We touched on this after the session, about where a student is in the learning process, how much effort they’ve put in, and how this impacts feedback, but it would have been interesting to explore it further. For example, with young children, they are really the experts in how much they know and can do, and their confidence and enthusiasm is fragile and sometimes fleeting. Perhaps this applies to adults too?

These thoughts were really reflected in the feedback I received later, which essentially said that the session was engaging, but that it would have been helpful to draw out the contextual questions more and also to come out with a clearer outcome or alternative approaches to feedback. I agree, perhaps I needed a little more time, or a little more boldness.

References:

Barton, G and Willcocks, J. (2017) ‘Object-based self-enquiry: A multi- and trans- disciplinary pedagogy for transformational learning’, Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 2(3), pp.229-245

France, P. and Almarode, J (2022) ‘Learning to Notice’, ascd, 01/11. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/learning-to-notice (Accessed: 02/03/23)

Hardie, K. (2015) ‘Innovative pedagogies series: Wow: The power of objects in object-based learning and teaching’, Higher Education Academy