I would wager that in most activities the teacher knows in advance most of the feedback they are likely to give.

This is because they are the expert, and they are in possession of a large stock of knowledge regarding the topic they are teaching.

In all cases, except that of the beginning teacher, this stock includes knowledge of what learners have done previously when completing activities of this type.

Pre-emptive feedback sees you tapping into your expertise and prior knowledge to outline in advance some of the ways learners can improve their work.

Let’s illustrate this with an example.

In an English lesson, the teacher has planned an activity in which learners are asked to create a piece of persuasive writing.

Having used a similar task before, and being experienced in the teaching of persuasive writing, the teacher is well placed to accurately predict the kind of mistakes learners will make, the kind of things they will overlook, and the kind of things they will ignore or fail to do.

This means the teacher is in a great position from which to craft pre-emptive feedback.

That is, feedback that closely matches learners’ needs, even though it has been crafted prior to their completing the work in question.

Imagine our English teacher sitting down in advance of the lesson.

They run through their plan and focus in on the persuasive writing activity.

Calling on their expertise and prior experience, they identify five pieces of feedback they feel will cover most learners in the class.

They add a slide into their PowerPoint detailing this feedback.

In the lesson proper, they reveal this slide when learners are about two-thirds of the way through the persuasive writing activity.

Suddenly, every learner in the class has something they can focus on to improve their work.

And, if any learners are not covered by the pre-emptive feedback, the teacher can work with these learners directly during the last third of the activity, giving them personalised feedback on which to act.

Repeated use of the technique habituates learners into an expectation that the work they produce during activities is a work-in-progress, rather than a finished product.

This helps them to see their efforts as being open to change.

It leads them to expect feedback as standard.

And to recognise it as something the teacher provides automatically.

With the intention of helping them improve, even if they are doing something for the first time.

Here are two examples that show the technique at work.

Example 1: History

The teacher plans a lesson in which learners examine a variety of sources from World War One, all of which come from the very start of the war.

The overarching objectives are to help learners develop a sense of the different attitudes prevalent at the time and to encourage a critical engagement with a range of sources.

Having taught the topic previously, the teacher knows that the first half of this activity is mostly taken up by learners examining the sources, decoding them, assimilating them and clarifying their meaning.

They prepare pre-emptive feedback that focuses on their second objective: encouraging a critical engagement with the sources.

They prepare the following five targets as pre-emptive feedback, which they intend to reveal when the activity is about half-way through:

1. Contrast two of the sources. Focus on identifying the similarities and differences in the attitudes on show.
2. Consider the extent to which the attitudes revealed by the sources are likely to be true. Analyse where the sources come from and use this to decide how reliable they are.
3. Try to explain why different attitudes are present in the sources. Think about the views of the authors, as well as their previous experiences.
4. Evaluate the usefulness of the sources in explaining general attitudes to the war. Consider whose voices are absent as well as whose voices we can gain access to.
5. Use one of the sources to critique the others. Look at the other sources through the lens of your chosen one. Identify how that source can shed light on the others.

Notice how this feedback directs learners towards more complex cognitive processes.

It is likely, given the shape of the activity, that many of them will not have started thinking in these ways by the midpoint of the task.

The teacher plans the pre-emptive feedback to move learners’ thinking forwards.

And to signal that feedback is an essential feature of the learning process.

Example 2: Art

The teacher is planning a lesson during which learners will be drawing a still life.

They have taught such lessons before and therefore have extensive experience on which to call when it comes to identifying pre-emptive feedback.

They know the kind of mistakes learners are likely to make.

And they know many simple tweaks learners will be able to make to improve their work.

So, they develop a pre-emptive feedback list, and plan to share it with learners halfway through the lesson.

It looks like this:

• Line. Look at your use of line. Think about how you could better render the lines of the still life. Look at how the still life flows and the kind of shapes you can see within.
• Proportion. Compare the proportions in your drawing with the proportions of the actual still life. Try to tweak your drawing so the proportions are closer to what you can see.
• Perspective. Think about how you are using perspective. Look again at the still life. Consider how your use of perspective has influenced your drawing. Try thinking about how a different perspective might send you down different paths.
• Shading. Look at the way in which you have used shading and whether this achieves what you intended to achieve. Try a different technique on another part of your drawing and compare the impact of the two methods.
• Accuracy. Identify a section of the still life and look intently at this. Consider how accurate your representation is. Look for ways you could enhance the accuracy.
• Scale. Compare the different elements of your still life. Ask yourself whether the scale shown in your drawing is the same as the scale you can see. Look for ways you could change your drawing, so the scale is closer to that of the physical objects.

We see here how the teacher has taken their expertise and used it to create feedback in advance.

Learners gain access to this midway through the activity and can use it to alter what they are doing.

It provokes further thinking, as well as changes in approach.

Another option open to the teacher is to share the pre-emptive feedback before the activity begins.

In this formulation, learners are encouraged to think about how they might approach the task before they start it, with this thinking informed by the teacher’s expertise regarding the likely areas they will overlook or which they might need to work on further down the line.