Challenging feedback myths: Values, learner involvement and promoting effects beyond the immediate task

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Health Professions Education
• Learning Sciences

Background:

• Current feedback practices in health professions are often ineffective.
• Feedback is frequently viewed as a one-time event rather than an ongoing process.
• Learners may become disengaged or defensive due to a focus on past deficits.

Purpose of the Study:

• To challenge and reframe common myths surrounding feedback in health professions education.
• To propose a more effective and learner-centered approach to feedback.
• To enhance the utility and impact of feedback for both learners and educators.

Main Methods:

• Deconstruction of three prevalent feedback myths: praise-criticism balancing, feedback as a teacher-centric skill, and feedback as a one-way input.
• Reframing each myth with supporting evidence and examples from existing literature.
• Conceptualizing feedback as a relational and iterative process.

Main Results:

• Challenging the myth that feedback requires a praise-criticism balance.
• Reframing feedback as a shared responsibility rather than solely a teacher's skill.
• Viewing feedback as an ongoing exchange with potential immediate and latent effects.

Conclusions:

• Empowering learners to actively participate in feedback processes can reduce emotional burdens and make techniques like the 'feedback sandwich' obsolete.
• Conceptualizing feedback as a relational activity benefits both learners and teachers.
• Tracing the effects of feedback, whether immediate or latent, can lead to significant changes in learner judgment and professional identity.