Lander | Small Group Instructional Feedback (SGIF)

Small Group Instructional Feedback (SGIF) is a form of mid-course formative feedback that is designed to channel student perceptions of their learning into opportunities for instructional improvement. Evidence shows that this small investment of in-class time can lead to increased student engagement and learning across the course. This anonymous, confidential process can also be done in online synchronous and asynchronous courses. Find more information in the SGIF brochure.

How will SGIF help?
Selected References

How will SGIF help?

Immediate feedback and concrete suggestions allow instructors to make timely adjustments as the course is progressing.
Students feel their voices have been heard and that the instructor is concerned about their learning.
The process is confidential and anonymous which tends to elicit more constructive feedback.
Using an intermediary encourages students to give honest feedback that better reflects upon student preferences and needs.
Students work in groups and hear what their peers think.
A guided discussion enables students to explain their ideas which helps the instructor to better understand and use the information.
The SGIF process by itself seems has beneficial effects, even before the faculty member makes changes based on the feedback.
It increases communication between the instructor and students.
It has a positive effect on student attitude towards the instructor and student motivation for the course.
It focuses on instructional improvement as opposed to administrative evaluation.
Results are discussed in a one-on-one follow-up session to help the instructor understand the feedback and brainstorm potential changes.
Evidence shows that it positively affects the results of end-of-semester evaluations.

Selected References

Bowden, D. (2004). Small Group Instructional Diagnosis: A Method for Enhancing Writing Instruction. WPA: Writing Program Administration, 28(1-2), 115. https://cetl.uni.edu/sites/default/files/small_group_instructional_diagnosis._a_method_for_enhancing_writing_instruction.pdf
Clark, J. & Bekey, J. (1979) Use of Small Groups in Instructional Evaluation. POD Quarterly: The Journal of the Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education, Paper 10. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/podqtrly/10
Crow, R., McGinty, D., & LeBaron, J. (2008). The Online Small Group Analysis (OSGA): Adapting a Tested Formative Assessment Technique for Online Teaching. MountainRise, 4(3). Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/506d/b6cd702b6eb3d4a0916eb1c2f285ddcc4981.pdf
Diamond, M. R. (2004). The usefulness of structured mid-term feedback as a catalyst for change in higher education classes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(3), 217-231.
Hurney, C. A., Harris, N. L., Bates Prins, S. C., & Kruck, S. E. (2014). The impact of a learner-centered, mid-semester course evaluation on students. Journal of Faculty Development, 28(3), 55. https://cetl.uni.edu/sites/default/files/impact_of_learner-centered_by_hurney_1.pdf
Mauger, D. (2010). Small group instructional feedback: A student perspective of its impact on the teaching and learning environment (Order No. 3407167). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (305248543). Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/13945432/SMALL_GROUP_INSTRUCTIONAL_FEEDBACK_A_STUDENT_PERSPECTIVE_OF_ITS_IMPACT_ON_THE_TEACHING_AND_LEARNING_ENVIRONMENT
Theall, M. Student Ratings: Myths vs. Research Evidence. BYU's FOCUS ON FACULTY Newsletter 10(3), 2. https://studentratings.byu.edu/info/faculty/myths.asp