# data[].attributes.body
A typical Math lesson does encompass all three stages: feed up, feed back and feed forward.

Feed up: teacher models how to solve a Math question by applying relevant concepts and formula. Through this process, it is made known explicitly to the students the success criteria.

Feed back: through in class desk work or homework assignments. Teacher would provide relevant feedback, identify and bridge students’ learning gaps.

Feed forward: teachers could opt to provide additional practices (of parallel questions) or through class tests/ pop quizzes to check if students have learnt from their mistakes.

# data[].attributes.body
Besides the provision of effective feedback, a teacher has to be reflective and cognizant of the learning gaps identified. Relevant tweaks might have to be made to the teaching pedagogies deployed in class in order to properly bridge the learning gaps/ address the learning needs of students.

# data[].attributes.body
Developing feedback literacy in students requires time, which is not a luxury given the current circumstance.

What is the tangible achievement in helping our students develop the relevant feedback literacy? Does it translate to helping students better manage their academic studies?

# data[].attributes.body
The four levels of feedback made me reflect on how I provide feedback to my students and its level of effectiveness.

1. Self-Level: When my students did not make any mistakes in their homework, I would leave a "good!" remark at the top of their paper. Also, when my students do well in their WA/EOY, I would also leave a "well done!" remark beside the mark. While it is ineffective as a feedback, it does give the students some positive feelings about themselves.

2. Task Level: When I circle students' work without leaving comments and return it to them, I'm assuming that they are aware of the misconceptions. However, from the students' viewpoint, as they are new learners of the topic, they wouldn't have any idea why it's a misconception.

3. Process Level: Very often, as I mark students' work, I would leave short remarks that informs students why it is wrong for that question or if it is a recurring issue throughout the homework, I would leave a general remark on their homework. If the error is common throughout most students, I would reiterate it in class when I return the homework to them. A concern that I have is: Do students read them? Do students understand me? What are students doing with the feedback that I gave?

4. Self-regulation Level: I realised I don't often provide such feedback. It made me wonder when would I need to give feedback at this level. Perhaps, it would benefit students who are already doing good work and I could extend their thinking to a broader or deeper level.

# data[].attributes.body
I resonated with this sentence found right under "4. How do Feedback Literacy Enabling Practices Look in the Classroom?":

The big idea of developing student feedback literacy is perhaps not just in helping students to clarify their understanding of standards and feedback comments, but also in helping them see the quality of their work through the teacher's eyes.

While teachers have the practices of feeding up, back & forward, a gap is present in how students react to them; students should not be passive receivers. How could we make them work "harder" than the teacher?

2 learning practices were provided: Peer Feedback & Analysing Examplers.

One way that I could think of to enact the analysis of examplers in the Math classroom is to provide an incorrect answer and get students to identify the mistakes and explain why it is wrong.

I see 2 benefits in doing so: 1. It's a way to close the loop with students (i.e. checking for feeding forward). 2. A way to develop their competencies in reasoning and communicating mathematically (AO3).

# data[].attributes.body
1. (Time concern) How could we be productive with every minute that we have with our students?

2. (Workload concern) It can be a lot of work on a single teacher to cover all bases all the time. What are some things that could be perhaps distributed amongst teachers to lighten the load?

# data[].attributes.body
The 4 Levels of Feedback
(The type of feedback we typically give and its effectiveness.)
I found greater insight to the categories of feedback that I generally give or annotate on students' assignments. It is useful for teachers to note on how effective our feedback has been, and how targeted we intend our feedback to be.

Upon understanding the different levels, I realise that I generally try my best to provide feedback in the Process Level, since students' misconceptions vary individually and can occur at many different points given one typical problem. We also need to catch on very quickly on the learning styles and abilities of our students, so as to provide the most effective feedback.

W ritten feedback VS Verbal feedback (Extend: How can each support the other?)
I started to ponder on the different ways in which the various levels of feedback can match with how we address a piece of returned assignment, and to what extent.

E.g. 1) Task Level feedback + Elaborated Verbal feedback to address misconception.
If I were to only circle out a specific error that led to an incorrect solution, i.e. in one step of workings, this level of feedback with no further comments will have to be verbally addressed and pointed out in class upon returning the assignment. This would be a possible pairing of feedback for very common misconceptions displayed in students' work. (and such that we mark assignments efficiently without having to leave repeated process level comments for almost every student.)

E.g. 2) Process Level feedback + Moderately Elaborated Verbal feedback.
If an error is not common across the entire class and only displayed by a small handful of students, then it may be a more targeted (or practical) approach to leave the students with information to ponder why and how their error came about. Upon returning the assignment, it would be useful for the teachers to then point out to these students (without much elaboration) to identify the errors using our comments. It also assists them to develop skills to identify such errors in future.

E.g. 3) Self-regulation Level feedback + Unelaborated Verbal feedback.
This type of feedback passes the thinking process back to the student in a deeper level than Process Level. When I do give this level of feedback, I have to be somewhat aware of the ability of the student to regulate this, otherwise it would be ineffective. This must also mean that the student receiving it already has a good grasp of basic to intermediate level problems and can build on their thinking for a higher-level error, or to extend their appreciation of a topic :)

# data[].attributes.body
One main point I takeaway from the reading is on the Levels of feedback. As a Math teacher, I do realise that my feedback mainly lies at the task/process level, which seems to be the most effective way when addressing students' misconceptions or error in their written work.

I also wonder how does self-regulation feedback, from a teacher, look like for Math lesson.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
If time permits, this seems interesting to try for students' corrections.

# data[].attributes.body
There were 2 areas which I thought were particularly interesting.

1. PQP (Praise-Question-Polish) protocol for peer feedback.
It made me reflect on how when I got students up to present and share their solutions, the classmates would always first point out their friend's mistakes instead of the good work done.

While it is important to learn from one another's mistakes, I think emphasizing the good practices which they friends have done are equally important. I would like to emphasize this more in the future- to start with the good work done, before we share about how to further improve the work.

2. Peer feedback (refer to table above)
This seems like an interesting way to get students to learn from one another and to also gradually help them take on the teacher's lens.

# data[].attributes.body
Being a BT, the methods/techniques of providing feedback to students have been communicated to me in NIE as well as from colleagues. But through this reading, I have gained a deeper understanding and classification of feedback via the four levels.

I myself have been practicing feedback to students on the task/process level as it seems the most effective way to correct students' misconceptions. But it is surprising to note that feedback on the self-level, which i thought was generally effective as it gives praise and instils motivation in students, is actually not.

I believe it is because students might have trouble interpreting the vague feedback of 'good effort' or 'try harder' in order to improve or maintain.
As such, it is about quality assurance; heading toward self-regulated level feedback. How to attain that? I think more time and reflection on the meaning behind it would be necessary.

# data[].attributes.body
Feedback is an impt part of correcting students' misconceptions n learning. Feedback will allow students to evaluate n reflect on their learnings. There are different level of feedback which I can use to either encourage or correct students misconceptions or mistakes.

# data[].attributes.body
Writing meaningful feedback can be time consuming. If it's a common mistake, it will be more efficient to address the mistake in the class.