The Dilemma of Feedback and Measures to Reduce the Burden: Towards Sustainable Feedback
（This is an English version of my previous post, フィードバックのジレンマと負担軽減策（sustainableなフィードバックを）.)
A problematic aspect for junior and senior high school English teachers is the management of writing assignments.
Assigning output tasks, such as English compositions, inevitably comes with the burden of correction and feedback on the part of teachers. Reading and providing feedback on each composition takes a considerable amount of time. For a class of 40 students, if we allow 3 minutes per feedback, it would take 120 minutes. Even with a faster 2 -minute feedback per student, it would still take 90 minutes. Teaching multiple classes, along with regular lesson preparation and administrative tasks, makes feedback a challenging burden.
Assigning an output task would add 1-2 hours of work per class. With this in mind, a reluctance to assign output tasks is understandable.
However, I do not endorse the approach of avoiding output tasks simply because giving feedback seems overwhelming. Output is essential to learning.
Certainly, appropriate feedback is desirable to optimize learning. But avoiding output tasks because of a lack of time for feedback would deprive students of valuable learning opportunities.
If we categorize the decision to assign output and the presence of feedback, we get three possibilities:
Output followed by feedback
Output without feedback
No output, no feedback
Undoubtedly, option 1 (output followed by feedback) is the most effective for learning, (depending, of course, on the quality of the feedback). What about options 2 and 3? While the effectiveness varies depending on the task design, providing output without much feedback (option 2) is likely to lead to more progress than providing no output opportunities at all (option 3). It may seem obvious, but avoiding output tasks because of the hassle of feedback is something all English teachers should avoid.
Output is essential to learning, but feedback is not necessarily a must. Learning is already happening when you are engaged in output.
Of course, it's valid to argue that if the output task is meaningless, it might be more beneficial to assign other tasks. However, that's a matter of task design, not whether to give output opportunities or not. Therefore, it's important to move away from the fixed idea that assigning output tasks requires extensive feedback. Instead, we should consider practical ways to increase students' output learning opportunities without significantly increasing the teacher's burden.
Realistically, however, simply returning assignments with a check mark can be tricky. Without the feeling of "someone actually read it," it can be difficult to keep students motivated to output, and there's also a desire as a teacher to maintain a connection with students.
So, here are three ways to provide feedback that minimizes time costs:
1. Simple Comments on Content
Provide comments only on the content without correcting language errors. Keep comments short to avoid spending too much time. The primary goal is to give a sense of "someone read it" and motivate the students for the next assignment, so we go for simplicity and do not even try to make the student learn something or notice something by the comments. For example:
Well done!
Nice work!
Very well-organized!
Easy to follow!
Or, if not entirely praiseworthy:
I understand what you mean!
That makes sense.
That's an interesting point of view!
You can also underline parts and ask questions like:
Why do you think so?
For example?
In any case, it is important not to think too much about elaborate feedback, but rather to give the feeling of having been "read" as the first priority, which is at least better than just a rubber stamp like "RECEIVED."
2. Highlighting Errors Only
It can take a considerable amount of time to correct the English of the part containing the error, but it does not take as much time if you just point out the error by underlining.
Highlight errors by underlining them. This approach doesn't necessarily mean that you are shortcutting; it encourages students to think more deeply. Allowing students to think about how to correct the highlighted errors is an essential part of the learning process. This method is particularly effective for tasks that require revision.
Errors that students can't correct on their own are unlikely to be learned even if the teacher provides the correct solution. In this sense, having students think about how to correct mistakes on their own leads to higher quality learning. It's a win-win for both the teacher and the student.
3. The 1 in 4 Rule
This rule suggests giving sufficient feedback on one out of every four assignments. Spend time on one in four and use a simple check for the other three.
Certainly, one in four is just the right frequency from the learner's point of view. It seems like just the right frequency to give the learners a sense that they are being watched. Some people may want to increase the frequency a bit more, to 1 in 3 Rule or so, but in any case, it is an important point that not all assignments need to be given feedback.
This idea was inspired by a video on this site, which presents several other helpful strategies for reducing the feedback burden.
The Most Important Thing: Ensure Student Understanding
To reduce the burden of feedback, it's important to explain and help students understand that while output is essential for learning, teacher feedback is not mandatory.
Output itself is a deep learning activity, and various insights occur during the act of producing output. While teacher feedback can enhance learning, it's not essential. Students shouldn't feel the need to write just because a teacher reads or corrects their work. The act of writing itself ensures that learning is progressing.
By explaining this clearly, most students should understand. (For those who don't grasp the concept, how much will they really understand and absorb, even if feedback is given?)
Of course, it's also necessary to let them know that if they have questions, they can come and ask. Fostering independent learners who can ask questions on their own is preferable, and having teachers intervene in everything from the beginning may not be desirable.
In conclusion, on the assumption that assigning output tasks is beneficial for student learning, this article has presented strategies for reducing the feedback burden on teachers and enabling continuous output learning for students. I hope that these strategies for reducing feedback burden can be a useful reference for you.