The Practice of Giving Feedback to Improve Teaching: What Is Effective?.
The Practice of Giving Feedback to Improve Teaching: What Is Effective?.
复制标题
提供反馈以改进教学的实践：什么是有效的？
DOI：
10.1080/00221546.1993.11778449
复制
发表时间：
1993
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Kathleen T. Brinko
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kathleen T. Brinko
尽管绝大多数学院和大学声称教学是他们的主要使命，但最近的研究表明，人们对美国的高等教育感到失望。在过去的十年里，许多个人和组织都迫切要求高等教育发生实质性的变化[1,11,52]。这些报告一直在批评高等教育的质量，并呼吁改善教学。在所有的教学发展努力中，最有希望从根本上改变高等教育教学的方法是为教师提供个性化的形成性反馈。在这个过程中，教师的教学信息被收集、总结并反馈给教师。虽然这种方法已经被发现非常有效，但它并没有一直成功[19,50]，可能是因为许多向老师反馈信息的人没有接受过反馈实践的培训[10]。虽然有大量关于反馈改善教学的文献，但大多数研究都集中在反馈给教师的信息种类上，而不是教师接收信息的过程。研究人员很少观察信息传递给教师的方式，更少分析这一过程。因此，对反馈的文献进行了回顾，以推断反馈给予的做法，可能是有效的，帮助中学后教师提高他们的教学。分析方法回顾了教育学、心理学和组织行为学领域有关反馈的文献。从这些文献中，我们分析了相关的理论作品、实证研究和文献的先前评论，以确定反馈实践中的艺术状态。读者要注意对本综述的一些发现的信心程度。首先，因为所有的文献都不是来自教育和教师发展领域，所以研究结果可能不像预期的那样适用于教学改进过程。作为研究对象的心理学学生与高等院校的教师有很大的不同；同样，商业和工业环境与学院和大学环境也大不相同。然而，当研究的潜在问题似乎适用于教学改进设置中的教师时，从教育，心理学和组织行为学的相关研究被包括在内。其次，因为所有的文献都不是来自实证研究，而是包括理论和共识的部分，一些发现可能比其他的更有信心。然而，当理论似乎合乎逻辑或共识基础广泛时，它们就会被纳入；忽视他们似乎是目光短浅。文献整理。Ilgen， Fisher和Taylor将反馈定义为“一般交流过程中的一种特殊情况，在这种情况下，一些发送者（以下称为消息源）向接收者传递信息”（第350页，原文斜体）。因此，给予反馈可以被视为一个事件。理解事件的一个有效方法是问一些基本的W问题：谁，什么时候，在哪里，为什么，怎样。在文章中，谁表示事件中的玩家、反馈源和反馈接受者。表示反馈给反馈接收者的信息。When表示信息被反馈的场合。其中表示信息被反馈的位置。Why表示信息被反馈的原因。“如何”表示提供和接收信息的方式。为什么要给出和接收反馈，在本文的范围内没有回答。大多数被审查的研究都没有明确或含蓄地讨论为什么要给出反馈。．..
Although the vast majority of colleges and universities claim teaching as their as their primary mission, recent studies have expressed diasppointment with American higher education. Over the past decade, a number of individuals and organizations have found pressed for substantive change in higher education [1, 11, 52[. Consistently these reports have critized the quality of postsecondary instruction and have clamored for the improvement of teaching. Among all instructional development efforts, the most promising way of fundamentally changing postsecondary teaching is to provide faculty with individualized formative feedback. In this process, information about an instructor's teaching is collected, summarized, and fed back to the faculty member. Although this method has been found to be extremely powerful, it has not been consistently successful [19, 50], possibly because many who feed back the information to the teacher are not trained in feedback-giving practice [13]. Although there exists an abundance of literature about feedback to improve teaching, most studies focus on the kind of information that is fed back to the instructor rather than the process by which the instructor receives the information. Rarely do researchers observe the way in which information is conveyed to instructors, and fewer still analyze this process [12]. Thus a review of the literature on feedback was undertaken to extrapolate feedback-giving practices that may be effective in helping postsecondary teachers to improve their teaching. Method of Analysis Literature pertaining to feedback in the fields of education, psychology, and organizational behavior was reviewed. From this literature, pertinent theoretical pieces, empirical studies, and prior reviews of the literature were analyzed in order to determine the state of the art in the practice of giving feedback. Readers are cautioned on the degree of confidence that can be placed on some findings of this review. First, because all of the literature was not derived from the fields of education and faculty development, the findings may not be as generalizable to the teaching improvement process as expected. Psychology students as research subjects differ considerably from postsecondary faculty; likewise, business and industrial settings are quite different from college and university settings. However, related studies from education, psychology, and organizational behavior were included when the underlying issues of the study seemed to be applicable to faculty in a teaching improvement setting. Second, because all of the literature was not derived from empirical studies but also included theoretical and consensual pieces, some findings may command greater confidence than others. However, when the theory seemed logical or the consensus was broad-based, they were included; to ignore them seemed short-sighted. Organizing the Literature. Ilgen, Fisher, and Taylor [41] conceptualize feedback as "a special case of the general communication process in which some sender (hereafter referred to as a source) conveys a message to recipient" (p. 350, italics in original). Therefore, giving feedback can be considered an event. One effective method for understanding events is to ask the essential W questions: who, what when, where, why, and how. In article, who denotes the players in the event, the feedback source and the feedback recipient. What denotes the information that is fed back to the feedback recipient. When denotes the occasion upon which the information is fed back. Where denotes the location in which the information is fed back. Why denotes the reason that the information is fed back. How denotes the manner in which the information is given and received. Why feedback is being given and received is not answered within the scope of this article. The majority of the studies reviewed do not explicitly or implicitly discuss why the feedback was given. …