Teacher-Student Interaction in Education: Effective Models and Feedback

Posted on Dec 21, 2024 in Physical Education

**Item 8: Interaction Between Teacher and Organizer**

Classification of Concepts

Interaction: Action is exerted mutually between two or more objects, agents, forces, etc.

In sociology, it is the “social process by which individuals or groups are stimulated or relate to each other.”

It is a dynamic, changing concept, comprising at least two people, whose respective behaviors are interrelated. It is a process of reciprocal influence and mutual dependency.

The relationship between teacher and pupil usually develops in a group situation, but within that, each student is a unit in its own right. As far as possible, all teacher-learner interaction should be guided by the principle of individualization.

The Presentation of Activities

• Clear and concise information, enrolling in those aspects that lead to success and, as far as possible, motivating the student.
• When teaching a new move, the information should be concentrated in a few respects, most important, to be increased progressively.
• The information for the student must be individualized and is often more successful than the collective.
• Depending on the people that make up the group, the amount and “quality” of our information will be decided.
• The status and position of the coach and the group are very important.

Interaction Model: Teacher/Student Animator

• Based on the integrated regulation of information given by Matting (1970).
• An interaction model is an instrument for the description and analysis of a process that involves two parts: teacher/facilitator and student/practitioner.
• Through analyzing the two-phase model in the interactive process, we can organize our teaching resources in the most favorable way:

Phase 1: Initial or Reference Information

I₀ = Value established by the teacher

I₁ = Message delivered by the professor

I₂ = Message received by the student

I₃ = Interpretation of the message by the student

Phase 2: Knowledge of Implementation and Knowledge of Results

RM = Response of the student driver

FP = Feedback, the student’s own internal

VPPE = Value of the perception of student performance

EF = External feedback, additional teacher

Phase 1 Goal

Make the student build a mental framework of action (Adams memory trace or reference for motor adjustment) as tightly as possible to the motor response that is expected of him.

Phase 2 Aims

Getting the students to assimilate a series of adjustment patterns in successive trials will reduce the discrepancies between their references to planned action and the result of the action (to be able to get the mindset of action and motor response to be the same). To this end, the feedback has its own internal (feelings that the movement generates) and the sternum feedback or information presented to you by a teacher.

Possible causes of negative results:

• The internal feedback occurs with insufficient kinesthetic or erroneous interpretation by students of their own feelings.
• Selective inattention to stimuli that are implementing assistive and proper movement control.
• Lack of information about some aspects of implementation that are difficult or impossible to obtain for yourself (requires support from the teacher).
• The most important methodological aspects related to the feedback to implement are:

• Channel it into what you are doing well (booster +).
• Avoid redundant information.
• Increase the specific value of the information.
• Follow a logical order of teaching (information to be given priority).

Classification and Types of External Feedback from the Teacher-Facilitator-Coach

Depending on the time:

• Concurrent: during execution
• Terminal: after finishing the action
• Delayed: after a period of time

By the way, or channel:

• Auditory
• Visual
• Kinesthetic-tactile

According to the addressee:

• Individual
• Collective or group

According to the intention:

• Descriptive: describes a global or analytical performance of the student.
• Evaluating: emits a trial or quantitative or qualitative value.
• Comparative: Benchmarks the last run with earlier ones, making judgments as better, worse, (sometimes also compared with others).
• Explanatory: provides a brief explanation of cause-effect about an effect of the execution.
• Prescriptive: offers students a series of initiations descriptive of what to do to overcome the incorrectness committed and prescribes a series of exercises of assimilation or application.
• Affective: shows his approval/disapproval of the execution result. (Related to the positive or negative reinforcement).
• Interrogative: given the information indirectly through questions to the player certain aspects of its implementation, so reflect on them and how much from their mistakes.

Models of Interaction: Teacher/Animator Group

• This interaction is not the sum of the interaction Teacher – A₁ + Prof. – A₂ + prof, etc.
• Group interaction is not a mathematical interaction.
• The interaction between the teacher and each student may be beneficial or detrimental to the group.
• The professor, using different resources and strategies, should:

• Ensure that each student’s relationship within the group is an individuality and not an undifferentiated element.
• Promote a positive collective attitude beneficial to all members of the group (good classroom environment or social environment).

Masterly Exposition-Type Model

• The teacher gives initial information or reference but does not know the results or does not know the student group.
• There is no student; there is a block called “group,” an undifferentiated whole.
• The proposed level/performance is unique, running what the teacher says/does.

Mass Type Model

• Each student, after the initial information, gives the teacher a motor response (observed by this).
• The teacher gives an understanding of the global results, overall the whole group (mass), not individually. Does not take into account the difference in the students. No attention is paid to the individual.