I’ve been facilitating a team of K-12 educators over the past several months in an exploration of teacher feedback and its impact on student learning because we all have too many examples of feedback not leading to learning. Initially we examined the need for effective feedback to be timely, specific, and aligned to learning goals. While those characteristics matter, they are not sufficient.
For feedback to impact learning, students must do more than receive it. They must:
- interpret it
- connect it to their current understanding
- decide what action to take
Let’s explore one aspect of feedback—explicit and open feedback—and compare how each applies to student learning and teacher learning.
Explicit Feedback tells the learner what to do or correct. It provides clarity, reduces confusion, and moves learning forward when the learner is stuck.
Open Feedback prompts the learner to think about what to do next. It invites reflection, builds independence, and positions the learner as the decision-maker.
Consider a teacher’s feedback to a student writing to a prompt about school uniforms.
Student: “School uniforms are good because they make everyone the same.”
Explicit Feedback – “You need to add a specific example or fact. For example, you could explain how uniforms reduce bullying or include a statistic about schools with uniforms. Add at least one concrete piece of evidence to support your claim.”
Open Feedback – “Why does ‘being the same’ matter—and how could you show that to your reader?”
The goal isn’t to choose the right type of feedback. The goal is to choose the right level of support for this student right now.
Explicit——Scaffolded Open
Telling—–Guiding Thinking—–Prompting Thinking
Mentoring—–Co-creating—–Reflective Coaching
Feedback doesn’t become learning until the learner does something with it.
This same continuum that supports student learning can guide coaching decisions with teachers. Just as teachers make decisions about when students need explicit feedback and when they benefit more from open feedback, instructional coaches and mentors make similar decisions when working with teachers. One way to understand this shift when working with teachers is to consider the difference between mentoring responses and coaching responses.
Mentoring responses are often more explicit: providing direction to reduce uncertainty and help teachers move forward when they are stuck or when they are developing new instructional practices.
“Here’s a strategy you might try.”
“Let me show you how this could look.”
“You may want to consider structuring the task this way.”
Coaching responses tend to be more open, inviting teachers into analysis and decision-making.
“What were you noticing about how students responded?”
“What do you think students needed there?”
“Thoughts about how you might approach that?”
The goal isn’t to choose the right type of feedback. The goal is to choose the right level of support for this teacher right now.
Explicit—–Scaffolded Open
Telling—–Guiding Thinking—–Prompting Thinking
Mentoring —–Co-creating—–Reflective Coaching
When teachers are uncertain about how to proceed or experimenting with unfamiliar strategies, more explicit mentoring support may be the most productive response. As teachers gain experience and insight, open coaching questions often become more powerful in supporting continued growth.
In my coaching practice, I am continually exploring, interpreting, and testing where the coachee is on the continuum. I tend to begin with more open conversations and look for cues about how ready the coachee is to take ownership of decisions about what to implement in practice. I want to provide just enough support for the teacher to have some ownership of the next step. At a minimum, the teacher is part of planning a strategy with me that I am going to model. This might then extend into co-planning a teacher’s next step. Serving as a thinking partner and co-creator, we move along the continuum building the teacher’s empowerment with decision making. It’s critical that as we move across the continuum, I model that I am learning as the teacher is learning.
Years ago, I was influenced by Dan Meyer’s reminder to “be less helpful” when designing learning experiences. His message was that over-scaffolding can unintentionally remove the thinking and problem solving we want students to engage in. I’ve carried that same thinking into my coaching practice—providing just enough support for the teacher to move forward while preserving ownership of the thinking.
Coaches, like teachers working with students, are continually adjusting their interactions as conditions for learners and teachers change. Whether working with students or teachers, the same principle applies:
Feedback becomes powerful when it positions the learner as an active participant in the thinking that leads to action.
