Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What attributes guide best practice for effective feedback? A scoping review

  • Review
  • Published:
Advances in Health Sciences Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There has been an observed increase in literature concerning feedback within the last decade, with the importance of feedback well documented. Current discourse promotes feedback as an interactive, dialogic process between the learner and the learning partner. While much has been written about effective feedback, less is known about key elements that support dialogic feedback. It is therefore important to investigate what is known about the elements that guide best practice for effective feedback. A scoping review of the extant literature following Arksey and O’Malley’s methodology was conducted. A search of literature published in English identified sixty-one publications eligible for this review. Publications were representative of the international literature from both empirical and non-empirical sources. Feedback elements were extracted from the included publications and categorised into 11 core attributes. The attributes identified feedback as: being a process; criteria-based; requiring multiple forms and sources of data/evidence; needs to be desired by the recipient (i.e. invited and welcomed); timely; responsive to the learner (i.e. tailored to developmental needs/learning preferences of the learner); frequent; future-focussed; reciprocal (i.e. two-way); involves skilful interaction; and is multidimensional (i.e. engages the learner in more than one way). Despite the rhetoric on feedback as a ‘dialogic process’, a gap remains in our understanding around what is required to engage the learner as an equal partner in the feedback process. Further research exploring the impact of specific aspects of the feedback process on practice is required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adamson, E., King, L., Foy, L., McLeod, M., Traynor, J., Watson, W., et al. (2018). Feedback in clinical practice: Enhancing the students’ experience through action research. Nurse Education in Practice, 31, 48–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajjawi, R., & Boud, D. J. (2017). Researching feedback dialogue: an interactional analysis approach. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(2), 252–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, J. C. (2010). State of the science in health professional education: Effective feedback. Medical Education, 44(1), 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03546.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattarai, M. (2007). ABCDEFG IS: The principle of constructive feedback. JNMA; Journal of the Nepal Medical Association, 46(167), 151–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. J., & Molloy, E. K. (2013). What is the problem with feedback? In D. J. Boud & E. K. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in higher and professional education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, L., Marshall, M., & Murdoch-Eaton, D. (2017). Medical student perceptions of feedback and feedback behaviors within the context of the “Educational Alliance”. Academic Medicine, 92(9), 1303–1312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brehaut, J. C., Colquhoun, H. L., Eva, K. W., Carroll, K., Sales, A., Michie, S., et al. (2016). Practice feedback interventions: 15 suggestions for optimizing effectiveness. Annals of Internal Medicine, 164(6), 435–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinko, K. T. (1993). The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching: What is effective? Journal of Higher Education, 64(5), 574–593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in university assessment. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chipchase, L., Buttrum, P., Dunwoodie, R., Hill, A., Mandrusiak, A., & Moran, M. (2012). Characteristics of student preparedness for clinical learning: Clinical educator perspectives using a Delphi approach. BMC Medical Education, 12(1), 112. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-12-112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, S., & Duggins, A. (2016). Why use quality feedback to guide professional learning. In Using quality feedback to guide professional learning: A framework for instructional leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

  • Cleary, M. L., & Walter, G. (2010). Giving feedback to learners in clinical and academic settings: Practical considerations. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 41(4), 153–154. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20100326-10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K., Drey, N., & Gould, D. (2009). What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(10), 1386–1400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbie, A., & Tysinger, J. W. (2005). Evidence-based strategies that help office-based teachers give effective feedback. Family Medicine, 37(9), 617–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ende, J. (1983). Feedback in clinical medical education. JAMA, 250(6), 777–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flott, E., & Linden, L. (2015). The clinical learning environment in nursing education: A concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(3), 501–513. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Getzlaf, B., Perry, B., Toffner, G., Lamarche, K., & Edwards, M. (2009). Effective instructor feedback: Perceptions of online graduate students. Journal of Educators Online, 6(2), 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gravett, S., & Petersen, N. (2002). Structuring dialogue with students via learning tasks. Innovative Higher Education, 26(4), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015833114292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greer, A., Pokorny, M., Clay, M., Brown, S., & Steele, L. (2010). Learner-centered characteristics of nurse educators. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship. https://doi.org/10.2202/1548-923X.1710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groves, M., Mitchell, M., Henderson, A., Jeffrey, C., Kelly, M., & Nulty, D. (2015). Critical factors about feedback: ‘They told me what I did wrong; but didn’t give me any feedback’. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 24(11–12), 1737–1739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halman, S., Dudek, N., Wood, T., Pugh, D., Touchie, C., McAleer, S., et al. (2016). Direct observation of clinical skills feedback scale: Development and validity evidence. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 28(4), 385–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, C. J., Konings, K. D., Schuwirth, L., Wass, V., & van der Vleuten, C. (2015). Barriers to the uptake and use of feedback in the context of summative assessment. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 20(1), 229–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewson, M. G., & Little, M. L. (1998). Giving feedback in medical education: Verification of recommended techniques. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 13(2), 111–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, T. S. (2009). Giving and receiving constructive feedback in pharmacy practice. Drug Topics, 153(6), 30–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Killion, J. (2015). Attributes of an effective feedback process. In: The feedback process: Transforming feedback for professional learning. Oxford, Ohio: Learning Forward.

  • Kitson, A. (1999). The relevance of scholarship for nursing research and practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(4), 773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latting, J. K. (1992). Giving corrective feedback: A decisional analysis. Social Work, 37(5), 424–430. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/37.5.424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O’Brien, K. K. (2010). Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5(1), 69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McArthur, J., & Huxham, M. (2013). Feedback unbound: From master to usher. In S. Merry, M. Price, D. Carless, & M. Taras (Eds.), Reconceptualising feedback in higher education: developing dialogue with students (pp. 92–102). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molloy, E. K., & Boud, D. J. (2013). Changing conceptions of feedback. In D. J. Boud & E. K. Molloy (Eds.), Feedback in higher and professional education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Motley, C. L., & Dolansky, M. A. (2015). Five steps to providing effective feedback in the clinical setting: A new approach to promote teamwork and collaboration. Journal of Nursing Education, 54(7), 399–403. https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20150617-08.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch-Eaton, D., & Sargeant, J. (2012). Maturational differences in undergraduate medical students’ perceptions about feedback. Medical Education, 46(7), 711–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D., & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nottingham, S., & Henning, J. (2014). Feedback in clinical education, part I: Characteristics of feedback provided by approved clinical instructors. Journal of Athletic Training, 49(1), 49–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donovan, B., Rust, C., & Price, M. (2016). A scholarly approach to solving the feedback dilemma in practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 938–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelgrim, E. A. M., Kramer, A. W. M., Mokkink, H. G. A., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2012). The process of feedback in workplace-based assessment: Organisation, delivery, continuity. Medical Education, 46(6), 604–612. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04266.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, C., Henderson, A., & Grealish, L. (2018). The behaviours of nurses that increase student accountability for learning in clinical practice: An integrative review. Nurse Education Today, 65, 177–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.02.029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramani, S., & Krackov, S. K. (2012). Twelve tips for giving feedback effectively in the clinical environment. Medical Teacher, 34(10), 787–791. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.684916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sargeant, J. M., Mann, K. V., van der Vleuten, C. P., & Metsemakers, J. F. (2009). Reflection: A link between receiving and using assessment feedback. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 14(3), 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-008-9124-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suhoyo, Y., Van Hell, E. A., Kerdijk, W., Emilia, O., Schönrock-Adema, J., Kuks, J. B. M., et al. (2017). Influence of feedback characteristics on perceived learning value of feedback in clerkships: Does culture matter? BMC Medical Education, 17(1), 69. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-0904-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J. D., & Arnold, R. M. (2011). Giving feedback. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 14(2), 233–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracy, S. J. (2013). Qualitative research methods : Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turock, A. (1980). Trainer feedback: A method for teaching interpersonal skills. Counselor Education and Supervision, 19(3), 216–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Umiker, W. O. (1994). Performance feedback: The crown jewel of communication. MLO: Medical Laboratory Observer, 26(1), 43–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Leeuw, R. M., & Slootweg, I. A. (2013). Twelve tips for making the best use of feedback. Medical Teacher, 35(5), 348–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Leeuw, R. M., Teunissen, P. W., & van der Vleuten, C. P. (2018). Broadening the scope of feedback to promote its relevance to workplace learning. Academic Medicine, 93(4), 556–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Rowntree, J., & Menezes, R. (2016). What do students want most from written feedback information? Distinguishing necessities from luxuries using a budgeting methodology. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(8), 1237–1253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, K. (2011). A chic critique. Psychology Today, 44(2), 54–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, M., & Carless, D. (2013). The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 285–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This review was undertaken as part of doctoral studies supported by Metro South Health Study, Education and Research Trust Account post graduate scholarship and a Research Training Program Domestic Fee Offset scholarship provided by the Australian Government Department of Education and Training (administered by Griffith University).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Christine Ossenberg, Amanda Henderson & Marion Mitchell

Authors
  1. Christine Ossenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amanda Henderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marion Mitchell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

CO: conceived the paper; gathered, analysed and interpreted the data and prepared the manuscript. AH: contributed to the data analysis and suggested revisions to the manuscript. MM: contributed to the data analysis and suggested revisions to the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christine Ossenberg.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

No. Not applicable for a literature review.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 299 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ossenberg, C., Henderson, A. & Mitchell, M. What attributes guide best practice for effective feedback? A scoping review. Adv in Health Sci Educ 24, 383–401 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-018-9854-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-018-9854-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation