The Honest Truth About High Expectations and Feedback in Teaching

Introduction

Observing colleagues, and reflecting on my own practice through the lens of my teaching philosophy, brings two fundamental tensions into sharp focus: setting high expectations and academic standards for learning, and providing accurate, timely feedback. These two aspects cut across all subjects and all ages. After all, an effective teacher is a subject specialist and professional (high expectations and standards), as well as knowledgeable about how to make students learn or the ability to find a fitting pedagogical approach. We hold these as ideals, yet the daily realities of the classroom often force compromises.

1. The High Expectations Tightrope

We know setting high expectations is crucial. Students often rise (or sink) to the level we set. Yet, we also know students frequently seek the path of least resistance – perhaps it’s inherent in the role? 

We have to make sure we are teaching the right things, and are informed by the latest developments in our subject. We establish minimum requirements, but simultaneously, we're deeply invested in keeping students motivated, engaged, and feeling supported. This creates a constant balancing act. How high can we push the expectations before motivation wanes or support needs to become overwhelming? The dividing line between desirable difficulty and overwhelming the students. If we're honest, sometimes, under the pressure of diverse student needs and limited time, those high standards we aspire to can slip. We make concessions, perhaps lowering the bar slightly to maintain engagement or manage students' workload.

2. The Feedback Imperative, and the Tools Gap

The second pillar is feedback. There are so many theories about learning, but reduced to its core, learning hinges on recognizing errors and understanding how to improve. As humans, we learn primarily from our mistakes, but only if those mistakes are identified, and a path towards correction or improvement is illuminated. Feedback needs to be accurate, specific, and timely to be truly effective.

This, again, is where ideals often collide with reality. Providing detailed, personalized feedback for every student on every relevant piece of work is incredibly time-consuming. We often lack the tools to do this efficiently. Consequently, feedback can become generic, delayed, or, in busy periods, regrettably minimal. We let things slip, not from lack of will, but often from lack of capacity.

This is where tools designed to assist with feedback generation, like the FlintK12, become interesting. They offer a potential way to provide more personalized and timely feedback without exponentially increasing teacher workload. Crucially, the teacher must remain central to this process – reviewing the AI-generated suggestions, adding nuance, correcting potential misinterpretations, and providing that essential human guidance on how to improve, or finding out why the mistake was made in the first place. The AI assists; it doesn't replace the pedagogical judgment.

Final Remarks: Assessment and Responsibility in times of AI

The potential use of AI in assessment brings broader implications. It prompts a necessary review of how and what we assess. If AI can help manage the feedback load for certain types of tasks, it might free educators to focus on more complex, performance-based, genuine and accessible assessments.

However, we must proceed with caution and awareness. The EU AI Act, for instance, classifies AI systems used for educational assessment or marking as 'high-risk'. This designation carries specific legal requirements regarding transparency, oversight, and accuracy. Schools planning to integrate such tools must diligently review their assessment policies and ensure full compliance. It's not just about pedagogical effectiveness; it's about ethical and legal responsibility.

In conclusion, striving for high academic standards and providing excellent feedback remain core to effective teaching. Acknowledging the challenges and exploring tools that might help us bridge the gap between our aspirations and our capacity, while remaining mindful of our ethical obligations, seems a necessary step forward.