As previously discussed, skill level can lead to differing use of intrinsic feedback. Weiner et al (2003) stated that;
Contrary to assumption that a skilled performance is automatic
and therefore increasingly less reliant on feedback, even skilled
performance can be dependant in intrinsic feedback
Weiner et al 2003 p.51
Contrary to Rushall & Siedentop (1972), Weiner et al (2003) believe in the importance of intrinsic feedback to the students’ progression in both the acquisition of a new skill as well as the development of existing performance skills. The self-efficiency that comes from intrinsic feedback could perhaps lead to stronger understanding of the dance exercise as the student has corrected themselves and understood the error. If augmented feedback was given maybe the student would rely on this again for future corrections.
After discussion concerning intrinsic feedback, the benefits of self-efficiency in learning and the limitations of intrinsic feedback, augmented feedback will now be evaluated. Instead of self corrective feedback, augmented feedback is provided externally by means such as teacher feedback and video playback. This form of feedback is often discussed as being of great importance in providing exact and efficient feedback to the student.
Augmented feedback ‘‘provides information that can facilitate skill learning’’( Magill 2007 p.268) and relates to feedback given to the student from an outside source. There are many forms of augmented feedback e.g. discussion or video playback. Before one uses a method of augmented feedback it is essential to ‘‘know how to implement that method most effectively and when to use it to facilitate learning’’( Magill 2007 p. 269). Augmented feedback can add to or enhance task-intrinsic feedback, as in addition to the sensory information, the teacher can inform and correct the student in ways that perhaps they could not achieve through their sensory system.
Augmented feedback is sub divided into two further categories; knowledge of results (KR) and knowledge of performance (KP), each providing different potential learning opportunities for students and allow for varied teaching methods for the teacher. KR ‘‘consists of externally presented information about the outcome of performing a skill or about achieving the goal of the performance’’ (Magill 2007 p.270). For example if the teacher informs the student that they did not achieve the required goal for the exercise performed, the student is receiving KR feedback. KP feedback provides information ‘‘about the movement characteristics that led to the performance outcome’’ (Magill 2007 p.271). In this type of augmented feedback the teacher provides an explanation for the reason why the student did not efficiently perform the set task. If a student attempts to perform a double pirouette but does not manage the full turn, the teacher could provide KP feedback by explaining that the student needed to ‘spot’ more carefully, or needed to use his or her arms more rapidly to facilitate the turning motion.
Since the beginning of the 20th Century, augmented information
feedback has been considered critically important for learning
motor skills
Swinnen 1996 p.37
Augmented feedback can provide opportunity for the dance teacher to direct the learning of an exercise and assist further in the students skill acquisition. Similarly, it can allow the student to receive assistance with improving and perfecting the learning of a new skill as well as encourage and motivate the student to succeed. However, in certain teaching and learning situations, the role of augmented feedback can be seen as unnecessary and of little value to the effectiveness of skill acquisition. These contrasting opinions will now be debated in relation to their importance towards a students learning.
A definitive benefit for augmented feedback is the provision to assist students who may be unable to use task – intrinsic feedback due to inability to obtain sensory information for themselves. As discussed previously, even advanced dance students may lack in self-efficiency, and thus acknowledging and correcting errors would prove challenging. ‘‘As a result, augmented feedback is essential for learning’’ (Magill 2007 p.273). For a ballet student, the execution of pose turns would not necessarily allow for opportunity for them to observe themselves visually, via auditory senses or tactile means. Thus students would rely on the teachers’ KP feedback, to provide advice or leg positioning and turn out, use of spotting, arm positions, and strength of releve, all of which they may not be able to correct and improve on alone.
Augmented feedback could also provide support and reassurance to the student, via the teachers corrections and encouragement. For a student to undergo the learning process with simply an initial instruction and then continue in a self-reliant way without this form of feedback could result in insufficient learning of the required skill, and potentially prevent further progress. Not only can augmented feedback ‘‘facilitate achievement of the action goal of the skill’’ (Magill 2007 p.272) by providing information concerning the success of the task, but it can also ‘‘motivate the learner to continue striving towards a goal’’ (Magill 2007 p.272). For example, the initial study of a pirouette will require confidence from the student, and feedback from the teacher as to their success in order for the student to progress. Less able students could also suffer without augmented feedback, as they may be unable to determine for themselves via task – intrinsic feedback, and would not receive valued support and encouragement to assist their self-confidence in the task.
It is the teachers’ responsibility from here as to at what level of error do they correct the student by providing augmented feedback. Magill (2007) discusses the ‘performance bandwidth’, and what level is an acceptable range of performance error. Augmented feedback is subsequently only given within this range. If a student does not achieve perfect turnout in a plie, it may not be essential for the teacher to give feedback as the turn-out could be something corrected in time.
In relation to the enhancement of skill learning with augmented feedback, Magill (2007) states that in learning a new skill, students
will learn them more quickly or perform them at a higher level
if they receive augmented feedback during practice
Magill 2007 p.275
Magill (2007) does not state that the use of augmented feedback is either essential or necessary, but that it can enhance skill acquisition for the student. ‘‘…the KP that works best is information about critical components of the coordination pattern’’ (Magill 2007 p.275). This will be particularly relevant in relation to the instruction of a new dance step, or the development of an existing enchainment. KP feedback following early trials at a new dance step can enable the student to achieve increased understanding, and assist the student in accomplishing the desired results. For example, it would be beneficial for a student learning a simple jump in 1st position to have KP feedback given following initial attempts if they are for example not replacing their heels or not bending their knees on landing. If KR feedback was given perhaps this would lead to a negative response as all the student would gain is the knowledge that their attempt was incorrect. It may not be essential for the student to obtain this KP feedback, as it is possible that they may develop this knowledge through intrinsic feedback.
Learners can attain a certain degree of success simply by making
repeated attempts to achieve the performance goal. But this goal
achievement process can be speeded up with the addition of KP
Magill 2007 p.275
However, in some situations of skill acquisition, augmented feedback would be an unnecessary and redundant provision. An example of this redundancy can be seen in the practice of the arm positioning in a single pirouette. If a student was learning the arm positioning in a single pirouette (turning to the right en dehors) by passing a small ball between their hands from 3rd position to 1st position during the turn and transferring the ball from the right hand to the left, the need for augmented feedback would be superfluous as the student would know whether they have performed the task correctly if the ball finishes in the left hand. This example demonstrates the learning of a skill that has ‘‘a detectable external referent’’ (Magill 2007 p.273) that allows for the student to make a connection between the skill being learnt and an outside factor that will indicate their success without the need of assistance.
Additionally, perhaps augmented feedback could be viewed in some circumstances to hinder skill acquisition as well be an irrelevant provision. If the dance student becomes dependant on augmented feedback their ability to correct their own mistakes and develop using their own initiative will be stalled. They will become reliant on the teachers feedback in order to progress, and will not gain the same cognitive understanding.
…augmented feedback has some pitfalls in that it can be
too directive, discouraging learners from processing intrinsic
information sources
Swinnen 1996 p.37
Further, the continuation of learning new dance skills will become dependant on augmented feedback from the teacher, as they may have become dependant on this assistance and will be unable to enhance their own skill acquisition unaided.
Timing issues related to augmented feedback are of great importance to the overall role augmented feedback has to the students’ learning. In the case of an enchainment, the question as to whether to give augmented KP feedback during the performance or following the performance is raised. Further, should KP feedback be given each time the student performs this enchainment. Perhaps an interruption during their performance would not be wholly beneficial as it may be difficult for the student to retain an understanding of the feedback whilst trying to continue with the exercise. This concurrent augmented feedback may not have the desired beneficial results as ‘‘performance gains during practice are seldom carried over to retention or transfer tests in which the augmented feedback is withdrawn’’ (Schmidt & Wulf 1997 p.1). However, terminal augmented feedback allows the student to concentrate on the feedback and thus for following practice of the exercise corrections can then be made by the student as they will have received augmented feedback at a time they are able to process it.
Although it could seem that augmented feedback may not always be essential in skill acquisition due to the possibility of success via self-recognition, not all students will be consciously aware of this connection, and be able to recognise their success or failure. In the example of the single pirouette, experience teaching using the previously discussed ‘ball change’ method is not always successful due to the student concentrating not only on arm positioning, but foot placing, turn out, spotting and releve. Therefore, augmented feedback will still assist in the complete cognitive learning of the pirouette as even with the use of the ball, they may not fully understand the reason why they may still be unable to achieve correct arm positioning. By receiving augmented feedback a clear explanation can be given.
A key issue in the understanding of the role and importance of feedback can be shown by examination of a students self-efficiency.
…the mediating factor between the presentation of the instructions
by the teacher and the performance of the skill by the student may
be the cognitive process of self-efficiency
Frank 2007 p.1
Bandura (1977) defines self-efficiency as the level of self-confidence that an individual has in his or her ability to successfully perform a given task. The stronger this belief is, the more likely they are to successfully perform this task. This self-efficiency can be directly related to feedback, as external influences can assist the degree of confidence that students feels towards the acquisition of a new skill. Similarly, intrinsic feedback will be facilitated as with internal confidence the student will believe they have the ability to improve. There is wide and contrasting research as to the relationship of feedback on self-efficiency and subsequently the outcome of the task.
Escarti and Guzman (1999) examined self-efficiency by asking subjects to pick from a selection of tasks of varying ability following execution of an initial basic task that had limited feedback. The results of this experiment demonstrated that KP feedback was related to increased self-efficiency, a higher level of performance, and the tendency to choose tasks of greater difficulty. The use of KP feedback appeared to have increased the self-confidence of the subjects, allowing them to progress in the set task and achieve a higher level of cognitive learning.
Differentiation within the type of feedback given is also an important consideration. Allen and Howe (1998) examined the effect of coach feedback on a group of female adolescents. Taking player ability into account so as to determine if self-efficiency is related to the athlete’s performance or due to the type of feedback given by the coach, they found varying results in relation to corrective feedback and praise. They concluded that due to the sensitivity to feedback by adolescent girls, they formed a negative reaction to corrective feedback believing this was a sign of low ability. In this case intrinsic feedback may prove to be of greater benefit to the students’ as self critique would not lead to feelings of failure, or embarrassment at the teachers’ ‘criticism’. Feedback given with praise and encouragement led to a positive reaction, and increased self-efficiency in subsequent performance of the tasks as they believed this was a sign of higher ability. Equally, Amorose & Weiss (1998) examined this role of evaluative feedback, concluding that praise was perceived as an indicator of higher ability which, in turn, led to increased self- efficiency in the performance of the task.
Amorose and Horn (2000) concluded similar finding to those of Allen and Howe (1998). In examination of a coaches behaviour on intrinsic motivation they found that athletes responded better with intrinsic motivation when the coach had given higher levels of positive feedback. Further, gender differentiation occurred in relation to the type of feedback. The female subjects had decreased intrinsic motivation with punishment orientated feedback, while the male subjects showed no affect to negative feedback. This investigation into gender differentiation in relation to the type of feedback given opens the debate into not only the importance of feedback, but the method of this feedback. A general overview of both augmented and intrinsic feedback has been evaluated, but further investigation into the different types of feedback that can be given is necessary in order to understand its effectiveness on dance teaching and learning. However, with evaluation of these findings it may be possible to assume that giving positive feedback to a student will enhance their self-confidence and thus assist in their understanding. The role of this feedback will serve as positive reinforcement in relation to the skill acquisition.
An initial evaluation of the actual content of augmented feedback was mentioned previously in relation to the experiments carried out by Amorose and Horn (2000), Allen and Howe (1998) and Amorose and Weiss (1998).
An often debated issue about augmented feedback content is
whether the information the instructor conveys to the learner
should refer to the mistakes he or she has made or those aspects
of the performance that are correct
Magill 2007 p.276
Magill (2007) states that information regarding performance errors is more effective to assist in skill improvement than concentrating on the correct aspects of the performance. For example feeding back to a student that they need to lower their heels after a changement will assist in their understanding of the step and provide an understanding for continued repetition of this exercise. However as Swinnen (1996) states;
…when KR is presented frequently the subject may rely on it so
extensively that self-generated error detection based on evaluation
of response-produced sensory information is not fully conducted
Swinnen 1996 p.52
In contrast, Amorose and Weiss (1998) and Allen and Howe (1998) both determined that negative performance feedback and correction can lead to decreased self-efficiency as well as decreased prolonged progression in achievement of the particular motor skill. But on identification and continuation following feedback, the student may result in restricted progression.
In addition to the type of positive or negative feedback given, detail of content within the augmented feedback is also of importance to the students’ skill acquisition. Quantitative augmented feedback includes a numerical value that relates to the magnitude of the performance, for example when a student performs a developpe the teacher could instruct the student to increase the angle of her leg by 10 degrees. This may be possible with proprioceptive intrinsic feedback, but the accuracy of quantative augmented feedback may lead to increased performance proficiency. Qualitative augmented feedback tends to be used more favourably in dance teaching, when the feedback is of a descriptive nature e.g. the teacher could instruct the student to bend his or her knees more, lengthen his or her arms or stretch the feet more. The results of these two types of feedback on the learner show that in the early stages of learning, students’ tend to respond more positively to quantitative augmented feedback due to the specific numerical nature of it, allowing for exact comprehension (Magill 2007). However the more experienced student will gain enough information from the qualitative augmented feedback. Qualitative augmented feedback, alongside visual intrinsic feedback, could allow for students to make independent corrections based on their knowledge, as well as receive additional guidance on further corrections. This balance could be seen to be one optimal solution to equality between the roles of intrinsic and augmented feedback.
The role of these two methods of augmented feedback can both be identified as of importance to the learner, as both provide opportunity for the student to respond to and improve. However this is if the importance of augmented feedback and its benefits are accepted.
Feedback has many beneficial values to students’ when learning a new skill in dance. The most important factor to consider when discussing the importance of feedback is the relevance of the type of feedback given to the particular skill being taught. In the case of a tap dancing class perhaps the importance of intrinsic feedback will be of greater value to the learning of a plie in a ballet class. The timing of augmented feedback will also play an important role in its effectiveness as if a student is attempting a pirouette for the first time perhaps the necessity of instant correction via augmented feedback will be detrimental and unnecessary. Each individual student will respond differently to feedback, and equally each student will learn in a different way. Some may respond better to critical feedback, while others need reassurance through praise. The role of the teacher will be to determine these factors and subsequently respond by choosing an appropriate method of feedback, if any.
Appendix A
The Feedback Family
Illustration of different types of feedback in the feedback family that are related to learning and performing motor skills (Magill 2007 p.270)
Bibliography
Bandura, A (1977) Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Frank, Monica A. (2007) Feedback, Self-efficiency, and the Development of Motor Skills
Magil, R. A (2007) The Stages of learning in Motor learning: Concepts and Applications. Singapore: McGraw – Hill Higher Education
Rushall, B. S. & Siedentop, D. (1972). The development and control of behaviour in sport and physical education. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger
Swinnen, Stephan P. (1996) ‘‘Chapter 3: Information Feedback for Motor Skill Learning: A Review’’ from Zelanik, Howard N. (ed) Advances in Motor Learning and Control Champaign, Il.: Human Kinetics
Weinner, B.I., Freedheim, D.K., Schinka, J.A., (2003) Handbook of Psychology; John Wiley and Sons
Journals
Allen, J.B. & Howe, B.L. (1998). Player ability, coach feedback, and female adolescent athletes’ perceived competence and satisfaction. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20
Amarose, A.J. & Horn, T.S. (2000) Intrinsic motivation: Relationships with collegiate athletes’ gender, scholarship status, and perceptions of their coaches’ behaviour. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 22
Amorose, A.J. & Weiss, M.R. (1998) Coaching Feedback as a source of information about perceptions of ability: A Developmental examination. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20
Escarti, A. & Guzman, J.F. (1999) Effects of feedback on self-efficiency, performance, and choice in an athletic task. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology 11
Schmidt, A.R & Wulf, G (1997) Continuous Concurrent Feedback Degrades Skill Learning: Implications for Training and Simulation. Journal Article in Human Factors Vol. 39
