“Stella doesn’t seem to be learning from her mistakes. She keeps making the same errors over and over again, no matter how many times I tell her.”

customer service evaluation satisfaction survey concepts

This all too familiar remark reverberates constantly amongst parents and  educators, particularly those supporting learners with dyslexia. We generally expect  them to be able to self-correct after having been told or reminded as and when their errors are spotted. However, learners with dyslexia often do not retain these  occasional reminders and if they do, not for a long period of time. Challenges in  phonological processing that are further compounded by weaknesses in executive  function impact automaticity in information processing, ability to sustain focus and  working memory. These are commonly demonstrated in poor reading, spelling and  writing performance, difficulties applying grammatical rules consistently, remembering  sequence of events, as well as acquiring study and organisation skills (Nicolson &  Fawcett, 2001).

In our preoccupation with teaching concepts and strategies essential for  reading and writing, the ability to demonstrate accuracy and consistency in application  of phonogram concepts in literacy tasks would be a demonstration of learning we  would want to observe. Sadler (2007) highlighted three conditions that should be satisfied before learning is said to have taken place:

  • students ‘.. must be able to do, on demand, something they could not do before,
  • students must be able to do it independentlof particular others, those others  being primarily the teacher and members of a learning group (if any) and,
  • students ‘must be able to do it well’ where they would be able to apply ‘..routinised  knowledge,....with a modicum of tentative or experimental knowledge, so as to ‘do’  previously unseen tasks’.

In other words, they need to be able to apply the same  skills and integrate them in aspects of learning in various other disciplines and contexts. (pp. 390-391)

Should the above behaviours not be observed, verbal feedback in the form of  prompts, reminders, questions, suggestions or the explicit teaching of additional strategies would be given in the hope that these could lead to better performance in  subsequent tasks. However, experience tells us that this is far from evincible. Many  teachers and therapists resort to re-teaching concepts and  engaging students in  countless practice as studies deem this necessary to develop greater automaticity.  Yet, once they are out of remediation classes, away from the watchful eyes and  guidance of their therapists and several new concepts later, teachers find themselves  reiterating the same mantra all over again. What seems to be the problem here? Is  there something we are not paying particular attention to?

Theories in educational assessment have identified feedback as a key factor  that drives learning and instruction. Feedback that we receive from learners as a  result of our teaching comes in the form of their verbal and written response in the  activities we design in every lesson. It provides us with information about ‘..how and  why the child understands and misunderstands, and what directions the student must  take to improve’ (Hattie, 1999, p.9) It also helps us understand if there are areas we  can improve on and how we can make the learning experience a better one for them  in future. Feedback we provide to learners in response to their work or questions  enable them to reflect on what they have learnt and identify areas where they have  not fully understood or need more time to process. Depending on how it is articulated,  feedback certainly provides more specific and meaningful information on what and  where exactly their learning gaps are and how they can improve, much more than  what grades and performance bands can deliver.

In our pursuit to equip dyslexic learners with the necessary literacy skills such  as decoding, fluency, reading comprehension and writing, have we also thought about  the ways in which our learners perceive and process feedback? Have we ever  questioned ourselves what the expectations are, of our role as teachers and their role  as learners with the feedback that we provide? Are we fully capitalising on the  feedback we receive from our students in ways that would help them improve? Are  our learners processing feedback we have been providing them the way we want  them to? These are certainly pertinent questions worth pondering over.

Conceptualised as ‘information provided by an agent (eg. teacher, peer, book,  parent, self, experience) regarding aspects of one’s performance or understanding’  (Hattie & Timperley, 2007, p. 81), the main purpose of feedback is to close the gaps  between current understandings and performance and goals (p. 86). Feedback which  can come in the form of a verbal, written or gestural response, has a significant effect  on student learning and has been described as ‘..the most powerful single moderator  that enhances achievement’ (Hattie, 1999, p.9) by helping learners develop  capabilities to monitor, evaluate and regulate their own learning (Nicol, 2010;  Ferguson, 2011; Ahea, 2016). These, no doubt are executive function skills, which  we acknowledge to be additional learning challenges faced by learners with dyslexia.  What this suggests is that it is not sufficient to equip them with a whole array of literacy  skills, it is just as important that they acquire a range of other skills ‘...needed for  successful learning’ such as ‘...executive skills that underpin learning’ (Nicolson &  Fawcett, 2018, pp. 260-261). Feedback content may actually comprise discussions  on specific concepts, techniques, strategies, procedures or other aspects of the  quality of student’s work that may not be restricted to academic knowledge. It could  focus on skills, values, attitudes or task completion strategy. Feedback literacy has  been recognised to ‘..play an important part in shaping learning futures’ (Eraut, 2006),  the goals and objectives of which are seen to assist in developing the ‘whole-child’,  supporting ‘..both academic and non-academic aspects’ of the child’s growth,  encompassing learning attitudes and dispositions (Tan & Wong, 2018, p. 126).

Feedback literacy therefore, entails learners attempting to listen to, understand  and internalise information they receive from various sources and using it to enhance  their work or learning strategies’ (Carless & Boud, 2018). As with the process of  acquiring basic literacy skills, the cognitive resources and processes harnessed in the  learning of new concepts would also have to be utilised in the processing of feedback.  Research suggests that learners with dyslexia benefit from instruction and the  teaching of skills that align with the Orton Gillingham (OG) principles of being  diagnostic and prescriptive, highly structured, sequential and cumulative, other than  adopting a multi-sensory and emotionally-sound approach. We can therefore  hypothesise that feedback practices that align with these principles may likely  facilitate enhanced learning for students with dyslexia.

This sounds like what teachers have been doing all along, doesn’t it? If so,  what is it about our current feedback practice that needs to be improved?

While the well-researched OG principles have been effective in equipping  dyslexic learners with the skills and strategies to cope with school demands, words  such as ‘diagnostic’ and ‘prescriptive’ tend to encapsulate learners as passive  recipients of knowledge and information. It has been argued that for feedback  processes to be effective, students need to play a more agentic role beyond just  receiving feedback. As therapists, we need to facilitate their journey from first  attempting to make sense out of feedback received, to understanding its purpose,  responding to it in productive ways and then ultimately empowering them with the  skills to actively make evaluative judgments and generate their own feedback about  their own performance and that of others (Carless and Boud, 2018). This then entails a mindset shift in the appreciation of the roles of teachers and learners involved in the  feedback process. Much like their typically developing peers, dyslexic learners need  to see themselves as capable of taking charge of and navigating their own learning.

Feedback that is effective in supporting and enhancing students’ learning takes  place in the form of a dialogic engagement between teachers and students, in the form  of a two-way feedback loop – teacher giving feedback to and getting feedback from  learners (Tan & Wong, 2018). Dialogic feedback provides a useful platform for  learners and teachers to reconcile or clarify differences. Productive interactions taking  place during dialogic feedback processes are said to have the potential to nurture  capabilities in students to reflect, self-regulate and make independent judgments  about their own areas of strength and those they would need further guidance in (Yang  & Carless, 2013).

Studies have identified three kinds of feedback questions : “feed-up,” “feed back,” and “feed-forward.” Feed-up (“where am I going?”) aims at providing information about “the attainment of learning goals related to the task or performance”  (Hattie and Timperley, 2007, p. 88). Feed-back (“how am I going?”) aims at providing  information “relative to a task/performance goal, often in relation to some expected  standards, to prior performance, and/or to success or failure on a specific part of the task” (p. 88). The third notion, feed-forward (“where to next?”), aims to provide  information on the strategies a student can adopt or processes he or she could go  through that can facilitate in achievement of the learning goals. Feeding forward is  effective when the information provided “leads to greater possibilities in learning” (p.  90).

As therapists, we could generally agree that we have been doing the ‘feed-up’  and ‘feed-back’ processes. Some of us would also have done the ‘feed-forward’ to  some extent, but this could be where the process reaches a standstill. Some of us  tend to make the assumption that learners would use the feedback given to improve  their learning without checking if they have actually used it or continue to use it to help  them improve (Crisp, 2007; Sadler, 2010a). There seems to be a general lack of  follow-up action on the part of teachers and therapists alike on learners’ productive,  continued and consistent use of feedback. With no consequence or incentive (if some  students need it), learners are not placed in a position where they are obliged to use  feedback unless they really WANT to. Most of us tend to focus our efforts on giving  feedback at task level, with no further efforts made to see them through to the self regulation level that facilitates deep processing and mastery (Tan & Wong, 2018).

Sadler (1989) further argues that opportunities for learners to utilise feedback  meaningfully cannot simply be left to chance or random occurrence. Feedback is only  deemed to have achieved its objective with intentional, meaningful and consistent  follow-up action taken by students (Yang & Carless, 2013; Boud, 2000).

So how can we make feedback more efficacious for students with dyslexia?  The following are some suggestions on how feedback practices can be better  implemented to encourage a more meaningful uptake.

FOCUS on....

  • EACH student and make it PERSONAL & TIMELY

It should begin with teachers having good knowledge of the learners’ individual  skills, competencies and struggles and one way for them to obtain this insight is to proactively interact with them and take the time to review their work (Ratnam-Lim &  Tan, 2015). Feedback should be given immediately after showing proof of learning so  that learners will have opportunities to connect it with the relevant learning experience  and respond appropriately. At this point, emphasis should also be placed on  developing learners’ awareness of the purpose of feedback given and self-awareness  of their strengths and areas requiring development. Learners with dyslexia may not  be aware of what they do or do not understand, what they have done wrong or where  they have done right, except when their teacher tells them so. Often, learning does not  go beyond this point and they will more than likely be making the same errors all over  again in the next task. Learners may also be externally motivated to correct their  errors or modify their behaviours purely to meet teachers’ expectations. In such  situations, it will be helpful for learners if they are shown clear examples of work  satisfying desired criteria or that which adheres to specific spelling rules taught. This  can form the basis for the identification and evaluation of areas of challenge they need  to work on, which can then be followed by the teaching of specific strategies and  formulation of learning goals, customised according to their learning needs and  preferences, eventually leading to a resolution of those errors or learning gaps (Shute,  2008). It is equally important that these processes are carried out in the form of a two way dialogue, rather than the teacher or therapist ‘..providing feedback as information’  (Tan & Wong, 2018, p.134). Lipnevich, Berg and Smith (2017) also stress the  importance of considering the current ability of individual learners when planning and  designing materials for use in the feedback dialogue. Feedback will likely continue to  remain as just information to learners unless it is directed towards a specific need and intentional and sustained efforts are made to address it. By collaborating on a system  to monitor the achievement of these goals, these could possibly lead to further milestones.

  • What learners have done right and what MUST be done to make other things right

Hattie and Timperley (2007) cautioned that types and delivery of feedback can  be ‘differentially effective’ (p. 81) across circumstances, situations and context. This  suggests that feedback may not necessarily contribute to positive learning experiences and outcomes. The manner in which feedback is given affects the way it  is received. The impact of teachers’ feedback can go both ways, that is, positive or  negative. Considering that dyslexic learners might have had less than desirable  experiences with feedback, it will be more emotionally sound to first highlight areas  where students have done well, ‘...rather than incorrect response... (Hattie &  Timperley, 2007, p. 85).

To reduce cognitive overload, teachers and therapist need to be selective about the areas they want to highlight to learners, maybe one or two important areas,  out of many others that learners can do something about. For example, out of the  many grammatical errors made in the learner’s writing (e.g. punctuation, tenses,  vocabulary, transition words), they may choose to focus on resolving basic  conventions first such as punctuation marks. Thereafter, work on a plan together with  learners on what they ‘MUST’ do rather than “can” or “should” do. What learners  MUST do with feedback should be planned and designed in measurable terms, what  they are capable of achieving. For example, having taught the learner when and where  to put full stops and commas in sentences, teacher and learner can work on designing  strategies and formulating goals within an agreed timeframe, to monitor his or her  application of these punctuation marks each time he or she is given a writing task. This allows for the transfer of feedback and learning accountability from the teacher to the  learner. Highlighting a few areas at a time make it more manageable for learners,  sufficient to motivate and sustain effort towards achieving identified goals.

Explicit and clear articulation and demonstration of performance expectations  leading to the formulation of goals

Feedback will have little effect on performance if students lack understanding  on the material studied (Kulhavy, 1997). Assessment and evaluation of learners’ work  or performance in any given task would provide critical information about their level of  understanding and ability to apply learnt concepts. For dyslexic learners, teachers  and therapists need to establish if errors made are due to a lack of conceptual  understanding, a lack of guiding strategies to apply learnt concepts or a lack of  monitoring skills. Teachers will need to have a good understanding of this before they can plan for an agreed and appropriate plan of action with the learners to address the  gaps.

For feedback to be effective, Sadler (1989) emphasised that:

  • students must understand what the expectations of a desired performance are and looks like (i.e., the student must have an awareness of a desired quality or criteria being aimed for). 
  • students must understand how current performance relates to desired performance (for this, the students are able to observe and compare current and desired performance).
  • students understand how to act to close the gap between current and desired performance. Teachers and therapists could perhaps work on formulating workable strategies to help students achieve the agreed desired levels of performance.

In addition, since feedback information may come in different forms and from different sources, Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick (2006) stress the importance of making  feedback language consistent and ‘...simple enough for students to understand’ (p. 206).  If feedback given is ‘...too lengthy or too complicated, many learners will not pay attention to it, rendering it useless” (Shute, 2008, p. 159).

Empower learners with good self-monitoring & self-checking skills, tools and strategies

For students with dyslexia, feedback practices should be encouraged to go  beyond just fulfilling corrective and reinforcement functions. Owing to dyslexia being  a lifelong condition, it is recommended that feedback practices should be structured  to explicitly develop students’ capacity to self-regulate learning (Beaumont, O’Doherty,  & Shannon, L. (2011). Students should be taught strategies that they can utilise to  help them proceed to subsequent steps, across learning domains and various  situations, an example of which is information chunking. Such practical skills will  enable dyslexic learners to better appreciate the value of feedback and its processes and motivate them to continue using the strategies shared during the dialogic feedback  process.

Develop self-confidence and motivation through emotionally-sound and sustainable  practices

  • Reframe mindsets

Sustainable dialogic feedback practices for students with dyslexia should focus  on strengthening emotional well-being in order to develop positive views of their  learning differences and stimulate a more active and pro-active involvement, where  valued feedback is constantly sought for the purpose of continued self-improvement.  They should be encouraged to capitalise on their learning differences towards building  capacities for themselves that would make future learning more productive and  effective. This requires a reframing of the mindsets of both teachers and students  away from the view of dyslexia to be a type of ‘disability’ or a ‘deficit’ to a strength or  learning difference.

Narrowly defining dyslexia as a deficit limits the support and educational experiences teachers would want to provide. A deficit view of dyslexia tends to define  learners in terms of ‘perceived deficiencies’ and ‘requiring specialised forms of  support’, which then emphasise weaknesses rather than strengths. Such views also  tend to conjure up assumptions of incompetence, thus limiting remedial action to focus  on narrowly constructed goals. These views need to be constantly challenged because  if we continue to define our learners by their deficits, we would undermine their  capacity to be successful (Rappolt-Schlichtmann, Boucher & Evans, 2018).

In the long run, teachers and students with such deficit thinking beliefs will  continue to see the latter as passive recipients of feedback and remain in that  comfortable zone of being overly-reliant on teachers to ‘correct’ them. Tan and Wong  (2018) believe that all learners are ‘...capable of using feedback for their learning if  they are properly trained and are given the opportunities to use it’ (Tan & Wong, 2018,  p. 130)

  • Sustainable feedback practices

Building on what was mentioned earlier, feedback practices that could possibly  encourage greater uptake from learners with dyslexia are those that align with the OG  principles of being emotionally-sound. Other than emphasising on the recognition of  ‘...correct, rather than incorrect response’, feedback that ‘...builds on changes from  previous trails’ (Hattie & Timperley, 2007, p. 85) will more than likely facilitate better  retention, owing to its incremental and cumulative feature. In the classroom, learners  could develop self-monitoring skills if teachers and therapists cultivate a culture of self and peer assessment, where learners would have opportunities to be drivers of their  own learning, be their own teachers and for others through deciding what learning  strategies to use for themselves and sharing them with their peers. Learners who  have developed a good awareness of their own strengths and weaknesses can be  activated as a source of knowledge for their peers. Self- and peer assessment  practices allow learners to take better ownership of their own learning and be able to  tell themselves what strategies are not working and actively explore alternatives to  help themselves.

Focus on the attainment of goals would also more likely be sustained when  students and teachers share a commitment to attain them. Teachers and parents  often assume that students share a commitment to academic goals but in reality,  developing this shared commitment needs to be nurtured and built over time and  through trusting relationships. 


Conclusion 


Effective feedback consists of information about progress and when  appropriately structured, has the potential to help students maximize their learning by  raising awareness of their individual strengths and/or areas of improvement, identify  the actions necessary to address areas they can improve on and how to proceed to  the next level or stage of learning.

For feedback processes to be effective, learners need to be actively involved in  the processing, responding to and generating feedback information. One-way  teacher-transmitted approach to feedback approaches are unlikely to result in  improved student learning and performance. Teachers and therapists need to go beyond correcting or highlighting mistakes and students’ weaknesses, prompting,  providing scaffolding techniques, re-teaching concepts, giving students suggestions  on improvements and giving students praise where deserved. They need to  consciously monitor whether students had understood or had benefited from the  feedback given and in so doing, develop their skills to monitor their own learning and  progress to go beyond current levels. In order to do so, teachers and therapists need  to be mindful of their perceptions of students’ abilities and its proclivity to shape their  own perceptions of feedback, how they deliver feedback and expectations of how their  students use it.

The benefits of feedback literacy go far beyond instilling self-awareness and  recognition of individual strengths and weaknesses. Its utility is best observed when  learners who used to require close guidance in attempting tasks are seen to be able  to pro-actively and independently make decisions about their own learning, in  collaboration with their teachers and be able to be the learning resources for their  peers. It offers valuable learning opportunities we should no longer ignore and deprive  our learners of.

Siti Asjamiah Binte Asmuri
Lead Educational Therapist / Associate Lecturer
Associate Fellow (RETA), Tampines Learning Centre / DAS Academy

Learn more about Asjamiah!

 
References: 
Ahea, M. (2016). The Value and Effectiveness of Feedback in Improving Students'  Learning and Professionalizing Teaching in Higher Education. Journal of Education  and Practice7(16), pp.38-41. 
Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M. & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment  feedback: a key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education. 36(6),  pp. 671-687. 
Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning  society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22, pp.151–167. 
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education43(8),  pp.1315-1325.
Crisp, B. (2007). Is it worth the effort? How feedback influences students’  subsequent submission of assessable work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher  Education, 32, pp.571–581. 
Eraut, M. Feedback (2006) Learning in Health and Social Care. 5: pp.111–118 
Ferguson, P. (2011). Student perceptions of quality feedback in teacher education.  Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(1), pp.51-62. 
Hattie, J. (1999). Influences on Student Learning. Auckland: University of Auckland.  pp.1-25 
Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational  Research. 77(1). Pp. 81-112 
Kulhavy, R. W. (1997). Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), pp. 211-232.
Lipnevich, A.A., Berg, D.A., & Smith, J.K. (2017). Toward a model of student  response to Feedback. In G.T.L. Brown & L.R. Harris (Eds), The Handbook of  Human and Social Conditions in Assessment (pp. 169-185). New York: Routledge 
Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes  in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, pp.501–517. 
Nicol, D. J., & MacfarlaneDick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and selfregulated  learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in higher  education31(2), 199-218. 
Nicolson, R. & Fawcett, A. (2001). Developmental dyslexia: The cerebellar deficit  hypothesis. Trends in Neurosciences. 24. pp. 508-511. 
Nicolson, R. I., & Fawcett, A. J. (2018). Procedural learning, dyslexia and delayed  neural commitment. In Reading and dyslexia (pp. 235-269). Springer, Cham. 
Rappolt-Schlichtmann, G., Boucher, A.R. & Evans, M. (2018). From Deficit  Remediation to Capacity Building: Learning to Enable Rather Than Disable Students  with Dyslexia. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools. 49. pp. 864-874 
Ratnam-Lim, C. T. L., & Tan, K. H. K. (2015) Large-scale implementation of  formative assessment practices in an examination-oriented culture. Assessment in  Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22, pp.61–78. 
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, pp.119–144. 
Sadler, D. R. (2007). Perils in the meticulous specification of goals and assessment  criteria. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 14(3), pp.387-392. 
Sadler, D. R. (2010a). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, pp. 535–550. 
Shute, V.J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research.  78(1), pp. 153-189
Tan, K. H. K. (2011a). Assessment for learning in Singapore: Unpacking its  meanings and identifying some areas for improvement. Educational Research for  Policy and Practice, 10, 91–103. 
Tan, K., & Wong, H. (2018). Assessment Feedback in Primary Schools in Singapore  and Beyond. In A. Lipnevich & J. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of  Instructional Feedback (Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology, pp. 123-144).  Cambridge: Cambridge University. 
Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press. 
Yang, M. & Carless, D. (2013). The feedback triangle and the enhancement of  dialogic feedback processes. Teaching in Higher Education. 18(3). Pp. 285- 297.