|
GOLF
TEACHING PRO MAGAZINE®
Take the Challenge of Refining Feedback
Motivation
By Carl Swanback
USGTF Level III Member - Colchester, Connecticut
Whatever
you do, don’t touch the roof of your mouth with your tongue!
Hmm. Chances are you
just did touch your tongue to the roof of your mouth and might
continue to do so for some time as you read this article. This plays
into the theory, as outlined by Horst Abraham in Skiing Right
(Johnson Books, 1983), which says if you ask some-one to avoid a
behavior, that behavior often becomes magnified.
The same logic can be
applied to feedback presented in the context of a lesson. If you
frame the feedback in terms of what the student should not be doing,
he or she just might do the very thing you’re trying to prevent.
Need proof? How many times have you warned your students not to peek
while putting, only to find them looking up almost at contact? When
you put a positive spin on the directive and say something like,
“You’ve almost got it, now try to listen to the ball drop before
peeking,” don’t you find it more likely to perform the task as
intended?
Have you ever heard
the saying, “When you have a new hammer everything looks like a
nail”? From our first days as golf pros, we learn what things should
look like and how to recognize some of the common errors people make
while learning. We then take these notions into the class and apply
them to everything. It isn’t until farther down the road that we
learn some of those errors may be the result of physical or
equipment limitations or even misinterpretation of what we said or
did. However, by this time we have often fallen into the trap of
being judgmental. That’s not to say, of course, that instructors
shouldn’t evaluate student form and lend advice. That’s what being
an instructor is all about. The key to generating a positive
influence is to offer constructive feedback rather than make hollow
decrees or cast judgment. Feedback is hands down the best source of
motivation that teachers can offer.
Through helpful
feedback we can encourage individuals and groups, promote group
dynamics and mutual respect, and bolster self-esteem. It gives us as
educators the opportunity to improve performance and effectively
say, “Job well done.”
Feedback can be
either intrinsic (internal) or extrinsic (external). Intrinsic
feedback consists of inner perceptions that tell us we have made
progress (e.g., a feeling of being in control) or suffered a setback
(e.g., a sense of unease or discomfort). Extrinsic feedback has to
do with those cues from outside sources that trigger internal cues
(e.g., the extrinsic feedback of good grades triggers an internal
sense of accomplishment). We as teachers have control of both types
of feedback as we strive to set our guests up for success (see table
1).
When it comes to
dispensing feedback, it’s important to remember “you get more bees
with honey than vinegar.” You’ll want to keep the lesson positive
and build a comfortable group atmosphere. Recent studies have shown
that doing so will help facilitate a greater learning commitment,
higher self-worth, personal satisfaction, and greater bonding within
the group (Dubois et al. 1998; Manion and Alexander 1997).
When assessing
student performance, we compare a mental image of the ideal (the
latest standards) to the performance of the guest and then determine
the attainable level of success for that guest. The difference
between a good instructor and a great one is the ability of the
great instructor to see the glass as half full instead of half
empty. That is, great instructors use the ideal not to emphasize
what the guest is doing wrong, but rather to enhance deficient
skills to meet or complement the proficient ones. It’s the
difference between focusing on what the guest does wrong and fine
tuning what he or she is doing right.
• POSITIVE FEEDBACK –
Comments that support a positive action, i.e., “Your
address posture is just right.” Positive feedback can also take the
form of a confident feeling the student gets when they strike a ball
well.
• INDIVIDUAL FEEDBACK – Comments
or actions, positive or negative, given directly to the individual
to address their performance.
• NEGATIVE FEEDBACK – Comments
that discourage a negative action, i.e., “Don’t swing so fast.”
Negative feedback can also entail a negative physical consequence,
such as a lack of balance from over swinging
• GROUP FEEDBACK – Comments or
actions, positive or negative, that help a group bond, i.e., “This
is the most talented group of mid-handicappers I’ve had an
opportunity to work with.”
Tapping into
movements the guest already “owns” will activate prior knowledge and
help promote learning and self-esteem. If your approach to
introducing skills is to enhance or refine performance, you’ll tend
to be less judgmental. That is, if you start all of your
observations with “What I saw was __________” or “That was good, how
about trying this and see if it feels better?”, chances are you’ll
avoid being judgmental and the student will be more willing to
listen and learn.
Would
you want to be with someone who continually criticized you? Just as
positive commentary will enhance a student’s “ownership” of a
particular skill, adverse remarks have proven to have the opposite
effect (Eiser et al. 1995). A teacher who only offers negative or
judgmental feedback is unlikely to provide a quality experience for
the guest. Remember that it is not what you say but how you say it.
A teacher who offers positive feedback but lacks sincerity may cause
more damage than if the feedback was negative or withheld altogether
(Eiser et al. 1995).
As you prepare for
the coming season, take the challenge to make it one of your goals
to be positive in all that you do and all that you say. Offer a
little supportive feedback each time you deal with a person on or
off the links. As long as you keep the feedback positive and
sincere, people will take you more seriously and you will find that
your teachings are more fun, the guests will learn more, feel
better, and, likely return for more lessons.
And that’s when
positive feedback comes around full circle. (By the way, you can
stop touching the roof of your mouth with your tongue now!)
Carl Swanback is a
Level III certified instructor with more than 20 years of
international teaching experience. He is a former director of
training and has twice been nominated to a leading industry
management magazine’s list of future industry leaders. Swanback will
complete his Masters in Golf Course Operations Management, is
currently the Vice-President of Operations in Connecticut and free
lance consultant with Links Consulting Group. Carl can be contacted
at golfbetter@hotmail.com.
REFERENCES
Dubois, D.L. et a!.
1998. Self-esteem and adjustment in early adolescence: A
social-contextual perspective. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
27, 557-581.
Eiser, C., R.J. Eiser,
and T. Havermans. 1995. The measurement of self-esteem: Practical
and theoretical considerations. Journal of Personality and
Individual Differences, 1 8, 429-432.
Manion, V., and J.M.
Alexander. 1997. The benefits of peer collaboration on strategy
use, metacognitive causal attribution and recall. ’Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology 67, 268-289.
Atkinson, R.L. et al.
1981. Hildgards Introduction to Psychology Fort Worth, Texas:
Harcourt College Publishers.
Abraham, H. 1983.
Skiing Right. Boulder, Colorado: Johnson Books.
Back
to Main Articles
|