Background
As PSE and ISPT examiner, I assess both the spoken and written output of ESOL (see appendix 1 for acronyms) students using a framework which has been adapted from IELTS (see appendix 2). As a Language Development tutor, I operate as a mediator of assessment and feedback, i.e. helping students to understand and process both formative and summative feedback received from others.
Evaluation
Written feedback has limited value if learners cannot see the connection between the feedback received (Brooks, 2008), what they have produced and what they need to do next. It is an expectation from course leaders that I can help solve the time pressure problem on the writers of feedback on the main course, I can give them advice about how they can practically make improvements on the next assignment and, in some cases, justify the mark to them (Ibid, p.5). However, what I feel will be the most effective for learners (Watkins, 2002), is developing the meta cognitive skills to process this for themselves.
Going Forward
As Language Development tutor at UAL I have had the opportunity to work with a range of other practitioners and courses and, through these experiences, I have collected procedures for reflection, which, with the aim of fulfilling principles of good feedback (Nicol and MacFarlane-Dick 2006), I have begun using with the aim of helping learners to process their feedback. This I frame as feedback feedforward, an idea inspired by Paul Jackson, course leader of MA Graphic Branding and Identity at LCC, along with the accompanying Back to the Future (n.d.) branding (see figure 1).
Fig. 1. First slide of Processing Feedback/forward session for Bsc_Msc Fashion Management Year 1 (February 2025)
Gibbs (1988) Reflective Cycle (see figure 1) is a useful tool for reflective thinking, which I have learned about through teaching reflective writing for ‘collaborative units’ on a range of courses. It first focuses on how we feel – which is worth reflecting on before moving forward to the evaluative, analytical and action stages. The description stage represents the feedback given.
Fig 2. Gibbs reflective cycle (Gibbs, 1988)
The Hampel Method (ICCA, 2014) (see figure 2) is a system originally devised for legal professionals, which I learned from MA GBI course leader Paul Jackson, and places more emphasis on the action – feedforward.
Figure 3. The Hampel Method – (Adapted by Jackson, 2024)
We can synthesize the two processes – to address: what was the feedback? (description) why did you receive it? (analysis), what can you learn from this (evaluation)– and then, crucially, what will you do about it? (action).
To make it concrete, I introduce learners to the SMART GOALS frame, with which they can articulate their plan of action (see figure 4); the use of this structured approach can be useful for students with ADHD to set and manage goals (Next Steps 4 ADHD, 2024).
Figure 4. SMART GOALS (Next Step 4 ADHD, 2024)
Whilst currently students see me as the only mediator, it is my hope that, through using these models, students can work together socially (Vygotsky, 1987), and communicatively (Nunan, 1991), to help scaffold each other’s understanding of feedback and development.
Action Points:
What: Implement Feedback Feedforward lessons to process Block One – When: February/ March 2025 – Develop and reiterate February/ March 2026
What: Gather feedback on this approach from students and peers – When: March/ April 2025
Appendix 1: Acronyms
ESOL– English for Speakers of Other Languages
IELTS– International English Language Testing System
PSE– Pre-Sessional English
ISPT– In-sessional Progress Test
Appendix 2: Assessment Descriptors
References:
Back to the Future (n.d.) Available at: https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQiAUI52_-niASQabl_PqdkJQ-moVziM6ahfiYkZW9NSnhcciNw (Accessed on 02.02.2025)
Gibbs, G. (1988) Learning by Doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods, Oxford: Further Education Unit, Oxford Polytechnic.
ICCA Inns of College of Advocacy (2014) The Hampel Method. Available at: https://www.icca.ac.uk/post-qualification-training/cpd/advocacy-training/the-hampel-method/ (Accessed on 28.02.25)
Jackson, P. (2024) Feedback Feedforward. Unit 3 Major Project Proposal MA GBI UAL_2024
Nicol, D.J., and Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) ‘Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice’, Studies in Higher Education, 31: 2, 199 — 218
Next Steps 4 ADHD (2024) How to create smart goals, Available at: https://nextstep4adhd.com/how-to-create-smart-goals/ (Accessed on 13.03.2025)
Nunan, D. (1991) ‘Communicative Tasks and the Language Curriculum.’ TESOL Quarterly. 25 (2): 279–295. Available at: doi:10.2307/3587464. JSTOR 3587464. (Accessed on 20.02.25)
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987) ‘Thinking and speech’. In R.W. Rieber & A.S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Volume 1: Problems of general psychology (pp. 39–285). New York: Plenum Press. (Original work published 1934.)
Watkins, C. (2002) ‘Effective Learning,’ NSIN Research Matters Institute of Education. Issue 7 London: University of London