Pendleton’s rules
1. Check the learner wants and is ready for feedback.
2. Let the learner give comments/background to the material that is being assessed.
3. The learner states what was done well.
4. The observer(s) state what was done well.
5. The learner states what could be improved.
6. The observer(s) state how it could be improved.
7. An action plan for improvement is made.
a useful framework = grew up with this one bit rigid and formulaic nature
‘feedback sandwich’, which starts and ends with positive feedback.
Silverman and Kurtz
Start with the trainee’s agenda.
Look at the outcomes that the interview is trying to achieve.
Encourage self-assessment and self-problem solving first.
Involve the whole group in problem solving.
Use descriptive feedback.
Feedback should be balanced (what worked and what could be done differently).
Suggest alternatives.
Rehearse suggestions through role-play.
Be supportive.
The interview is a valuable tool for the whole group.
Introduce concepts, principles and research evidence as opportunities arise.
At the end, structure and summarise what has been learnt.
Vassilas and Ho (2000) identify that medical educationalists claim that using this method for groups and individuals is more likely to motivate adults, in particular, to learn.
The widely used Calgary-Cambridge approach to communication skills teaching (Silverman et al., 1996) is referred to by Walsh (2005) in his summary of ‘agenda-led, outcomes-based analysis’:
Feedback should be descriptive rather than judgmental and should also be balanced and objective.’
From
http://www.faculty.londondeanery.ac.uk/e-learning/feedback/models-of-giving...