Download to read offline
![to reposition [feedback] as a
practice that has
a positive
and sustained influence
on learning
Boud, D. & Molloy, E. 2013:699. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,
British Journal of Educational Technology. 38:6:698–712
“](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/presentationchs2-141011033723-conversion-gate02/75/Giving-and-receiving-feedback-on-Google-docs-in-Higher-Education-A-political-ethics-of-care-analysis-38-2048.jpg)
Uploaded byVivienne Bozalek
Giving and receiving feedback on Google docs in Higher Education: A political ethics of care analysis
The document discusses the importance of reframing feedback to enhance student learning through self-direction, peer collaboration, and reflection. It emphasizes the necessity of creating a supportive environment where feedback is given and received transparently, addressing vulnerabilities and fostering authentic communication. Additionally, it highlights the role of technology in enriching educational experiences and promoting the co-construction of knowledge in a trusting atmosphere.
More Related Content
Similar to Giving and receiving feedback on Google docs in Higher Education: A political ethics of care analysis
Giving and receiving feedback on Google docs in Higher Education: A political ethics of care analysis
- 1. Giving and Receiving Feedback Vivienne Bozalek Arona Dison Veronica Mitchell Melanie Alperstein
- 2.
- 6.
- 8. to change what students can do… …reframing the notion of feedback around the effect on students “
- 9. Vivienne Bozalek AronaDison Melanie Alperstein Veronica Mitchell
- 11. For learners tobe: More self-directed More reliant on feedback from peers More inclined to collaborate More inclined to being their own “nodes of production” Better equipped to capture information h#p://www.slideshare.net/2mbuckteeth/the-‐changing-‐face-‐of-‐digital-‐learning
- 16. (Caring about) recognisingthe need listening to the care receiver ‘asking the right questions’ (Weil, 1973)
- 17. Example: The facilitatorgave the participant directive advice about her project, ‘Simply putting the (on-line) tool there will not encourage people to use it.’ However he missed her description of the substantial mediation that had taken place in her intervention.
- 18. (caring for) willingnessto do something to meet needs extending responsibility beyond facilitators to participants
- 19. “What would youlike your participants to be able to be and to do at the end of the process” ?
- 20. “ The purposeof requiring students, who are themselves practicing health professionals and educators to reflect on their learning in the P G Diploma in Health Professional Education, is based on our belief that reflection enables students to develop a deeper understand and apply the content of a course to their own practice. Reflection is considered to be a powerful method of learning. Evidence of the educational value of reflection in becoming a professional is frequented described in the literature. Furthermore, once students have learnt how to reflect and how reflection is assessed an additional outcome would be that they will be able to apply it to their own context and be able to teach their students how to reflect.” (Melanie’s reflection 1)
- 21. (Care giving) Handson act of giving feedback: initially facilitators guiding more directly on task; peers on content
- 22. It is notabout the technical delivery such as the “formulaic response such as the feedback sandwhich” but the emotions and dialogue - before, during and after feedback Boud and Molloy, 2013
- 23. Care receiving bycare-giver exposing vulnerabilities (e.g. what had gone wrong in a project) feeling safe to ask for help
- 24. what participants dowith feedback agency of students/participants nested tasks to allow for ‘feed forward’ input at different stages to contribute to final product Boud and Molloy, 2012, 2013)
- 25. Caring with risk vulnerability honesty
- 26.
- 30.
- 31. Cloud computing “ educators should consider using technology to enhance communication and provide richer, more meaningful platforms for the social construction of knowledge Rowe, M., Bozalek, V. & Franz, J. 2013. Using Google Drive to facilitate a blended approach to authentic learning.
- 32. Talking back inGoogle Drive
- 33. Why Google Drive ? Collaboration - expanded potential New opportunities / affordances Online dialogue
- 34.
- 35. Giving How much? Power & hierarchy? Where will this conversation lead? Adequate discourse? Judgement? Empowering Shared new meanings Co-construction of knowledge Receiving Fear, defensiveness Discomfort to expose myself ? Shifting to teacher role? What impact will my comment have? Is it good enough? Participation democratic Evidence of trust, team effort My voice is valued Authentic constructivism
- 36. Critical friends sharedconstructions of knowledge are capable of “ providing richer frameworks for the cross-fertilization of ideas than those provided only by the frame of reference of the lecturer Bozalek, V. & Matthews., L. 2009:238. E-Learning: A cress-institutional forum for sharing socio-cultural influences on personal and professional identity. International Social Work 52:2
- 37.
- 38. to reposition [feedback]as a practice that has a positive and sustained influence on learning Boud, D. & Molloy, E. 2013:699. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, British Journal of Educational Technology. 38:6:698–712 “
- 39. Authentic task Healthygroup dynamics Modelling good practices Setting precedence of democratic caring Safe space Enough time for participation Acknowledging conflict and dealing with it
- 40. Risk & vulnerability Power and control - authoritarian approach Too knowledgeable Missing or unbalanced elements of care Set in old ways
- 41. Challenging assumptions onfeedback can be uncomfortable There is a need to wrestle with honest feedback Peer feedback ought to be encouraged
- 42.