On Feedback and Emotional Labour

Authors

  • El Spaeth Lecturer

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v6i3.359

Keywords:

assessment and feedback, emotional labour, compassion, emotions, workload

Abstract

This opinion piece argues that educators are performing emotional labour when giving feedback to students. I propose that this emotional labour is performed due to the desire to balance the promotion of student learning with the increasing need for efficiency and quality control. This attempt to balance an abundance of care with a dearth of time leaves a gap between the compassion an educator wants to provide, the guidelines that must be followed, and what is feasible from a workload perspective. Are we equipped to give effective feedback at scale, and what are the emotional strategies used for, and consequences of, doing so?

Author Biography

El Spaeth, Lecturer

Ellen Spaeth is an Academic and Digital Development Adviser at the University of Glasgow. Ellen has particular interests in the pedagogically-led use of technology and the emotional impact of learning, teaching, and assessment practices.

References

Darabi, M., Macaskill, A., & Reidy, L. (2017). A qualitative study of the UK academic role: positive features, negative aspects and associated stressors in a mainly teaching-focused university. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 41(4), 566–580.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2016.1159287
Nicol, D. J., & 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.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. C. (2004). Work Intensification and Emotional Labour among UK University Lecturers: An Exploratory Study. Organization Studies, 25(7), 1185–1203.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1177/0170840604046315
Pekrun, R. (2006). The Control-Value Theory of Achievement Emotions: Assumptions, Corollaries, and Implications for Educational Research and Practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Barchfeld, P., & Perry, R. P. (2011). Measuring emotions in students' learning and performance: The Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ). Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 36–48.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.10.002
Rowe, A. D., Fitness, J., & Wood, L. N. (2014). The role and functionality of emotions in feedback at university: a qualitative study. The Australian Educational Researcher, 41(3), 283–309.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-013-0135-7
Office for Students (2018). National Student Survey 2018 shows high satisfaction levels but still more to do - Office for Students. Retrieved from https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/news-blog-and-events/news-and-blog/national-student-survey-2018-shows-high-satisfaction-levels-but-still-more-to-do/
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2016a). Supporting Learners' Agentic Engagement With Feedback: A Systematic Review and a Taxonomy of Recipience Processes. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 17–37.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Rowntree, J., & Parker, M. (2016b). “It‘d be useful, but I wouldn’t use it”: barriers to university students’ feedback seeking and recipience. Studies in Higher Education, 42(11), 2026–2041.
doi: http://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1130032

Downloads

Published

2018-09-12

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 3 (2018): Special Issue on Compassionate Pedagogy

Section

Opinion Piece

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice has made best effort to ensure accuracy of the contents of this journal, however makes no claims to the authenticity and completeness of the articles published. Authors are responsible for ensuring copyright clearance for any images, tables etc which are supplied from an outside source.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.