Contextual Background:
As a member of technical staff, I am not included in formal assessments or marking. As a support technician, I very rarely teach lessons and therefore only have formal interactions with students in the form of supervised studio sessions or in informal technical tutorials and one-to-ones. This has meant that I have not viewed myself as a member of the teaching team who can or does give feedback. It is important for me to recognise that every time I am speaking to a student about their work, I am giving them a form of feedback, and I need to be able to do that in the most constructive way to give them the most benefit.
Evaluation:
As I do not view myself as a member of the teaching staff, I do not hold myself in the same regard when it comes to feedback and assessment. I view my interactions with the students more as “helping” rather than educating so do not place a large importance on my feedback and how I may communicate that. This is not accurate to how students will view me and may actually undermine the respect and boundaries that students have for me, my department, and their learning of specialist skills.
Moving forwards:
Self-regulated assessment: It is important to recognise that I will never be comfortable with giving feedback that feels absolute. When a student comes to me with a potential problem in their wig-making, I am not the only person in the department with that specialism who can help, and I will always encourage them to ask the other members of staff for advice as well. Without knowing, I have been encouraging my students to do more ‘self-examination’, prompting them to question what they really want out of themselves and their project so that they can communicate that to me, and I can give them the most beneficial guidance (Barrow, M., 2006). More purposefully promoting self-regulation and self-assessment will allow me to still position myself within my role correctly – I am not a part of their formal assessment or marking – whilst giving feedback that allows each student to further their projects and still feel open to other technical advice (Nicols, D.J., Macfarlane, D., 2006). Using question-based and student-lead feedback approaches can prompt internal feedback, leading to a potential for gained confidence in decision-making and better self-esteem as practitioners and students (Nicols, D.J., Macfarlane, D., 2006).
Disciplinary Assessment: As Nicols and Macfarlane also posit (2006), I am aware that this is not a fool-proof method to employ, and that some students may need more support to get to a place where they can internally-generate their own assessment. Assuming that university age students who are learning technically advanced specialist skills will immediately have confidence can be dangerous. I have learned you should never assume a student’s self-confidence; in fact, often it feels they are looking to you to lay the foundation first. In these instances, perhaps the use of disciplinary assessment would be more helpful, whereby the feedback is a little bit stricter and more specific in the steps the student needs to take to improve (Barrows, M., 2006). Giving feedback is just as much a learning process for me as it is for students, and I hope this new knowledge helps my confidence in the future to give the students the best learning experience possible.
Barrow, M. (2006) ‘Assessment and student transformation: linking character and intellect’, Studies in Higher Education, Volume 31 Number 3, pp. 357-372.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006) ‘Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice’, Studies in Higher Education, Volume 31 Number 2, pp. 199-218.