If you want to maximise feedback while minimising teacher workload, whole-class feedback seems like a good solution.

But is this practice always working as well as we expect it to?

Research evidence consistently indicates that whole-class feedback can be impactful when used effectively.

When any approach becomes popular, though - to the point where there are readily-available “handy” templates to help teachers deliver it - we should consider whether that practice is truly having a positive effect on pupils’ learning.

As every teacher knows, marking books can be a workload driver. In 2018, 65 per cent of secondary teachers and 58 per cent of primary teachers reported that their “marking workload” was “too much”. Whole-class feedback can help to manage that workload.

But does it neatly replace individual written feedback in terms of impact?

An interesting new research study on feedback raises questions about this. It’s a small study, involving 937 pupils in German secondary schools, in which computer-generated feedback was delivered on students’ responses to a writing task, with the aim of those students using this to revise and improve their writing.

The results were sobering: one in five students made no revisions at all, while nearly half (47 per cent) made no improvements that boosted their performance.

How to get whole-class feedback right

Although this study didn’t look specifically at whole-class feedback, it does reveal some of the challenges of impersonalised feedback. When pupils are not targeted as individuals, they may misunderstand the feedback, not be motivated by it or wrongly attribute issues to their peers, rather than themselves.

In other words, if pupils are to use whole-class feedback successfully, they require a lot of support.

Making effective use of feedback is a tricky process. First, pupils need to appreciate the feedback. Then they need to make judgements about what to do in response to it, while managing any emotional responses to that feedback. Finally, they need to act in a way that leads to improvements in performance.

Given this level of challenge, it is no surprise that a student who struggles with writing may listen to some whole-class feedback, dutifully look again at their efforts, and make little to no changes to their work.

For these reasons, the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) guidance Teacher Feedback to Improve Pupil Learning suggests that “one size fits all” approaches, like whole-class feedback, require careful thought. The writers present four key factors that might influence how pupils receive and respond to whole-class feedback:

• Pupil motivation and desire for feedback. How interested are pupils in their feedback? Are they even listening to the whole-class explanation?
• Pupil self-confidence. Do they assume that general feedback is only for their “struggling” peers? Are they disheartened by not receiving individual feedback?
• Trust in the teacher. Do pupils feel the feedback is unfair criticism? Or do they understand that the whole-class feedback is about helping them to reach high but achievable standards?
• Working memory limits. Are pupils really taking all of the points from the whole-class feedback session on board? Does their response template allow them to chunk the feedback down into something accessible and actionable?

Feedback is an important part of teaching and learning, as well as being a workload driver, so it is crucial that teachers are afforded the time to reflect on how to deliver it well.

Whole-class feedback can easily go wrong. By paying attention to the conditions we set around its delivery and ensuring that we question whether pupils are really taking it on board, we can maximise the opportunity for feedback that truly boosts learning.

Alex Quigley is the author of Why Learning Fails (And What To Do About It)

For an indispensable look at the week’s biggest stories and talking points, sign up for our Weekly Debrief newsletter