Feedback Conversations

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Feedback Conversations by Mind Map: Feedback Conversations

1. What would you seek to communicate verbally?

1.1. I would communicate the general issues that I found in the draft

1.2. I would discuss the comments with them if something is not clear, or they would like to understand further

1.3. I would be surer to answer any questions the student asks and encourage them to take notes on thos comments.

1.4. I'd want to find positive things to say, and reassure the student that revising and editing is part of the process, so they don't feel overwhelmed by whatever work remains.

1.5. To be honest I find verbally communicating all the written feedback points, and expanding and explaining is really helpful to students. A lot of my students are not good at reading written feedback, or they scan over it and don't actually understand it. I think have the verbal feedback also provides the student with the opportunity to ask any direct questions.

2. What would you write down on a separate response sheet?

2.1. I usually write down a summary of comments (probably the ones shared verbally) at the end of the draft, so they can keep track of them. And they can write notes next to any points discussed.

2.2. General questions/issues followed by a criterion by criterion list of guiding questions.

2.2.1. I would probably format this so that the student had space to write notes to respond to each of the questions.

2.2.2. I think I missed this the first time around,b but I like the idea of grouping the comments I have by Criteria.

2.3. Agree - I think my response sheet would be directly linked to the wording used in the assessment criteria.

2.3.1. Yes, the more tailored/structured feedback can be to the rubric, the more effective it is. As long as the strands are put into the students own language or exemplified clearly.

3. What actions would you undertake if for example you feel there are some major weaknesses in the draft?

3.1. I would usually set up a meeting with the student to discuss their progress, understanding, challenges.

3.2. If it is a case of lack of effort, then I refer the issue to our principle and decide whether to call student into a formal meeting or e-mail the parents.

3.3. I would schedule a meeting/confer with the EE Coordinator to discuss a remediation plan, especially if this occurs past a deadline.

3.4. I would schedule a meeting with the student to discuss the problems with the draft, and would also inform the DP coordinator to ensure they are aware. I would provide both written and verbal feedback.

3.5. I would arrange a meeting with the individual student and provide detailed written and verbal feedback. I would also keep the EE coordinator in the loop.

3.6. I er on the side of caution generally and get the coordinator and parent involved early in the process. The Draft stage is quite late for significant weaknesses to be overcome. A push may be needed.

4. How could you deal with common errors found in the first draft amongst many students?

4.1. I think I would present the students with the list of common errors, and invite them to reflect on how successful they have been in avoiding these common issues.

4.1.1. Using a list of common errors makes so much sense! I agree - I think a list of common errors would be very useful. I wonder if there is something already out there.

4.2. We also try to incorporate them in their research classes pre-emptively or review them if it is a common issue in the cohort.

4.2.1. Having a vertically articulated plan for teaching research skills is something I've been working on.

4.3. I highlight the issues noted in the Subject Specific Criteria and the Score Reports and ask the students to pay attention to these as they re-read their paper.

5. What elements would you want to include on a final submission checklist?

5.1. I think the checklist would include the general elements of each criterion and more detailed checklist of presentation requirements.

5.1.1. This is a sensible plan. This might be more useful for a student if some specific examples are provided. Perhaps excerpts from stong EE

5.2. Specific elements of presentation, including RQ, MLA/APA/Chicago references & headings, Bibliography, word count

5.3. Our checklist is broken down into a number of subheadings, but some key features include structure and layout, correct referencing. As well as referring to the RQ consistently in the intro, the essay and conclusion.

5.3.1. Also - conclusions after each section, including all the arguments in the main conclusion

6. I would highlight the skills they demonstrated well. Going through the rubrics to highlight how they are meeting each criteria and then also remarking on areas of improvement based on the rubrics