Colleagues,
I'd like to compare approaches to feedback across the Trust, particularly where we're trying to improve its impact without increasing marking workload.
One thing emerging from our recent discussions is that the amount of written feedback pupils receive doesn't necessarily appear to correlate with how much they subsequently improve.
We're therefore exploring whether we can make feedback more deliberately focused on what pupils need to do next.
Some approaches currently being trialled include:
• Whole-class feedback following common misconceptions
• Live verbal feedback during independent practice
• Short improvement tasks rather than lengthy written comments
• Using model answers to support self-correction
• Identifying recurring misconceptions and addressing them at the start of the next lesson
The intention isn't to reduce the quality of feedback.
It's to make sure that the time staff spend giving feedback actually contributes to learning rather than simply producing more marking.
I'd be particularly interested in what colleagues have found works with older pupils, where there can be an expectation that effective feedback means extensive written commentary.
Sarah
We've moved quite heavily towards whole-class feedback in Maths.
After an assessment, we identify the three or four most significant misconceptions rather than writing individual comments on every question.
We then build a short retrieval or correction activity around those misconceptions.
Staff seem to be getting more useful information from the process, while pupils are actually doing something with the feedback.
We've been experimenting with something similar in English.
One unexpected benefit is that discussing common weaknesses publicly can make pupils realise that other people are making the same mistakes.
It seems to reduce the sense that feedback is a private judgement on their work.
We've also found that giving pupils a strong model and asking them to identify the differences can sometimes be more productive than another paragraph of teacher commentary.
I'd be interested in how we're making sure this remains accessible for pupils who need additional support.
Whole-class feedback works well when pupils can identify the issue being discussed.
For some learners, we may still need a more explicit next step or a worked example.
The principle I'd suggest is consistency of purpose rather than identical provision.
The workload point is particularly relevant for ECTs.
There's still a perception that a teacher who has written more comments has necessarily provided better feedback.
Having a Trust-wide discussion about what effective feedback actually looks like could help challenge that assumption.
I completely agree.
I'd like us to move towards asking:
"What changed in the pupil's work as a result of this feedback?"
rather than:
"How much feedback did the teacher provide?"
That feels much closer to the purpose of feedback.
I'll include this question in our next teaching-and-learning review.