Face to face feedback can take a variety of forms, for example they can take on the form of a mock exam or be more informal with question and answer sessions. They can also be one to one or involve several groups.
For example, peer and lecturer feedback have both been found to be beneficial to students.
There are many benefits to face-to-face formative feedback including;
- Real time feedback
- Variety of feedback methods- written, verbal.
- Encouraging confidence
- Peer feedback
- Lecturer feedback
- Engages students.
- Can be used to support a range of student learning needs.
- Self-assessment
- Peer dialogue- explaining theories
- Positive impacts on motivation for learning, as often no grades are attached to face-to-face learning. Therefore encourages a focus on learning goals instead of performance goals.
- Allows lecturers to praise efforts and learning behaviours, without needing to focus on attainment, which may result in improved self-esteem.
- Providing real time feedback on student understanding to the lecturer, allowing teaching methods to be adapted to the current cohort needs.
- Encourages an active classroom.
- It can be difficult to begin with for students with lower confidence, but can raise this in a supportive environment.
- Requires full participation by all group members, so must be facilitated.
- Can be resource intensive.
- Encourage participation from all group members
- Make sure that all facilitators are engaged with the learning objectives of the formative assessment.
- Ensure that the resources required (staff, rooms, material resources) are available and that any supporting technology is working.
- Ensure that there is a method for collating/recording feedback for staff and students.
- Ensure that facilitators are aware of the emotional impact of learning in small groups.
- Make sure that if assessment is involved that there is clarity of the marking process so that students have confidence in the assessment process (Vickerman, 2009; Kritikos et al., 2011).
Face to face or in class feedback allows staff to gain feedback about individual and cohort learning and students to gain peer and staff feedback in real time.
A popular mechanism for formative feedback it allows for a variety of methods to suit both the required outcomes of the task and the cohort.
It can allow for feedback on a range of questioning styles, including MCQs, case study scenarios and case management and can be focussed on developing both specific skills, practice examination techniques, confidence (Vickerman, 2009) and soft skills which are required by future employers.
It can also facilitate different feedback mechanisms, including self, peer and lecturer feedback.
Ideally formative feedback should encourage the principals of good feedback (Nicol and MacFarlane-Dick, 2006) and face-to-face feedback can provide this whilst also increase student engagement (Vickerman, 2009; Kritikos et al., 2011).
Research has shown that face-to-face feedback can be received well by students (McCarthy, 2017) however care must be taken not to increase pressure on staff workloads and resources (Higgins, Grant and Thompson, 2015).
Cartney, P. and Rouse, A. (2006) ‘The emotional impact of learning in small groups: highlighting the impact on student progression and retention’, Teaching in Higher Education, 11(1), pp. 79–91. doi: 10.1080/13562510500400180.
Higgins, M., Grant, F. and Thompson, P. (2015) ‘Formative Assessment : Balancing Educational Effectiveness and Resource Efficiency Formative Assessment : Balancing Educational Effectiveness and Resource Efficiency’, 4205. doi: 10.11120/jebe.2010.05020004.
Joyner, B. and Young, L. (2006) ‘Teaching medical students using role play: twelve tips for successful role plays.’, Medical teacher, 28(3), pp. 225–229. doi: 10.1080/01421590600711252.
Kappers, W. M. and Cutler, S. (2014) ‘Poll Everywhere! Even in the Classroom: An investigation into the impact of using PollEverywhere in a large-lecture classroom.’, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, p. 1. Available at: http://ezproxy.swu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&AN=115955793&site=eds-live.
Kritikos, V. S., Woulfe, J., Sukkar, M. B. and Saini, B. (2011) ‘Intergroup peer assessment in problem-based learning tutorials for undergraduate Pharmacy students’, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 75(4). doi: 10.5688/ajpe75473.
McCarthy, J. (2017) ‘Enhancing feedback in higher education: Students’ attitudes towards online and in-class formative assessment feedback models’, Active Learning in Higher Education, 18(2), pp. 127–141. doi: 10.1177/1469787417707615.
Nicol, D. and MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006) ‘Formative assessment and selfregulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice’, Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), pp. 199–218. doi: 10.1080/03075070600572090.
Premkumar, K. and Coupal, C. (2008) ‘Rules of engagement-12 tips for successful use of “clickers” in the classroom.’, Medical Teacher, 30(2), pp. 146–149. doi: 10.1080/01421590801965111.
Rao, D. and Stupans, I. (2012) ‘Exploring the potential of role play in higher education : development of a typology and teacher guidelines’, 49(4), pp. 427–436.
Vickerman, P. (2009) ‘Student perspectives on formative peer assessment: an attempt to deepen learning?’, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34(2), pp. 221–230. doi: 10.1080/02602930801955986.
Need inspiration? Click the approaches in the table below.
| Approach | Pros | Cons |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|