Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T01:24:38.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rightful Demise of the Sh*t Sandwich: Providing Effective Feedback

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2014

Ian Andrew James
Ian Andrew James*
Affiliation:
NTW NHS Foundation Trust, and Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
*
Reprint requests to Ian James, Newcastle General Hospital, Centre for the Health of the Elderly, Castleside Offices, Westgate Road, Newcastle upon Tyne NE4 6BE, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: As a trainee cognitive therapist in the early 1990s, I was taught the Sh*t Sandwich by my supervisor. I continued to use this technique for many years without seeing the need to extend my repertoire of feedback strategies. Aims: This article describes a number of other feedback techniques, raising awareness of the processes underpinning feedback, and facilitating reflection on feedback methods. Method: This review examines feedback and the methods of feedback used to improve clinical competence. Results: Evidence informs us that the use of good feedback has a significant effect on learners’ outcomes (Milne, 2009). However, despite recognition of its importance, many supervisors fail to give adequate feedback and utilize methods that are sub-optimal. One such problematic method is the notorious “Sh*t Sandwich” (SS), which attempts to hide criticism within a cushion of two positive statements. This paper looks at various models of giving negative and positive feedback, suggesting that our repertoire of feedback methods may require expanding. Conclusion: The review suggests that feedback is a complex process and methods that place an emphasis on the learner as an active participant in the learning process (i.e. interactive approaches) should be encouraged. The paper suggests that negative feedback should generally be avoided in favour of constructive support, accompanied by specific, descriptive, balanced feedback, with new learning being consolidated by role play. Generally, feedback should be given about the task rather than the person, but when it is personalized it should relate to effort rather than ability.

Keywords

Feedback interventionsupervisiontraining
Type
Research Article
Information
Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Volume 43 , Issue 6 , November 2015 , pp. 759 - 766
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blackburn, I. M., James, I.A., Milne, D. L. and Reichelt, F. K. (2001). The revised cognitive therapy scale (CTS-R): psychometric properties. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 29, 431–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brookhart, S. (2008). How To Give Effective Feedback To Your Students. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
Butler, R. and Nisan, M. (1986). Effects of no feedback, task-related comments, and grades on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 210–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, J. and Larson, L. (2001). The impact of performance feedback on counselling self-efficacy and counsellor anxiety. Counselor Education and Supervision, 41, 120–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dweck, C.S. (2006). Mindset. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Friedlander, M., Siegel, S. M. and Brenock, K. (1989). Parallel process in counselling and supervision: a case study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddock, G., Devane, S., Bradshaw, T., McGovern, J., Tarrier, N., Kinderman, P., et al. (2001). An investigation into the psychometric properties of the Cognitive Therapy Scale for Psychosis (CTS-Psy). Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 29, 221–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hattie, J. and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, M. A., Hill, C. E., Holmes, S. E. and Freitas, G. F. (2005). Supervisor perspective on the process and outcome of giving easy, difficult, or no feedback to supervisees. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, F. (2007). Feedback to enhance student learning: facilitating interactive feedback on clinical skills. International Journal of Clinical Skills, 1, 21–24.Google Scholar
James, I. A., Allen, K. and Collerton, D. (2004). A post-analysis of emotions in supervision. Behaviour and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 32, 507–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, I. A., Milne, D., Morse, R. and Blackburn, I. M. (2007). Conducting successful supervision: novel elements towards an integrative approach. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 35, 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluger, A. and DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis and a preliminary intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Kopala, M. (1987). The impact of supervisory interventions on self-efficacy and anxiety of counselors: an evaluation of the single case research design. Dissertation Abstracts International, 49, 733A. (UMI No. 880781)Google Scholar
Lane, E. J.Daugherty, T. K. and Nyman, S. J. (1998). Feedback on ability in counselling, self-efficacy and persistence on task. Psychological Reports, 83, 1113–1114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larson, L. M. (1998). The social cognitive model of counselor training. The Counseling Psychologist, 26, 219–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Londondeaneryeportfolio (2013). How To Give and Receive Feedback http//www.faculty.londondeanery.ac.uk/e-learning/feedback/ (accessed 24.06.2013).Google Scholar
McCoy, J. (2005). 2-Way Feedback. Victoria, Aus: Carneige Services Pty Ltd.Google Scholar
Milne, D. (2009). Evidence-Based Clinical Supervision. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Milne, D. L. and James, I. (2000). A systematic review of effective clinical supervision. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 39, 111–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, D. and James, I. A. (2002). The observed impact of training on competence in clinical supervision. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 41, 55–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mueller, C. M. and Dweck, C. S. (1998). Intelligence praise can undermine motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 33–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Page, E. (1958). Teacher comments and student performance: a seventy-four classroom experiment in school motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 49, 173–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pendleton, D., Schofield, T., Tate, P. and Havelock, P. (1984). The Consultation: an approach to learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Roth, A. and Pilling, S. (2007). The Competences Required to Deliver Effective CBT for People with Depression and with Anxiety Disorders. London: Department of Health, 283713 (Sept).Google Scholar
Roth, A., Pilling, S. and Turner, J. (2010). Therapist training and supervision in clinical trials: implications for clinical practice. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 38, 291–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vassilas, C. and Ho, L. (2000). Video for teaching purposes. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 6, 304–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Young, J. and Beck, A. T. (1980). Cognitive Therapy Scale. Unpublished assessment instrument. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.