Critique Protocols Strategy Guide - PBLWorks

STRATEGY GUIDE
Critique Protocols
+TIPS for Remote and Hybrid Classrooms
Critique protocols are structured processes that guide students in giving and receiving high quality feed-
back. They can be written or verbal, silent or noisy, and with varying degrees of collaboration. Critique
protocols are valuable processes for improving student learning and quality work at all stages of a project.
The protocol you use can be tailored to focus on big picture ideas or product details.
Why is it useful?
Critique protocols are impactful in a variety of ways—from improved student work to increased content
understanding to greater independence and interdependence. Seeing each other’s work and comparing it to
their own and to an agreed-upon set of quality criteria normalizes the standard for quality among students
and raises the bar for work Students must think critically about content to evaluate one another’s work and
provide descriptive feedback. Peer critique processes contribute to an overall a culture of collaboration and
student ownership of learning.
In remote/hybrid learning environments, protocols can help to ensure both active engagement and equity
of voice. The clear expectations and boundaries around participation in a protocol can foster trust and safe-
ty and help to build a culture for feedback.
© 2020 Buck Institute for Education www.pblworks.org 1

STRATEGY GUIDE Critique Protocols
What do I do?
Understanding the Two Major Types of Critique

Protocol
There are many variations on critique protocols; however, they generally fall into two categories: protocols
for giving high-level feedback on a variety of work samples, and protocols for giving in-depth feedback on a
single work sample. Both types of feedback protocols are structured processes that require planning.
High-Level Feedback on Multiple Artifacts

Protocols for giving high-level feedback on multiple pieces of work, such as the Gallery Walk or Feedback
Carousel, are typically appropriate for early stages of development. In these protocols, students’ work typ-
ically stands alone without verbal explanation. The owner of the work is not with their work and does not
receive the feedback immediately. This allows the critics to be silently contemplative as well as anonymous
if you choose.
Deep Feedback on a Single Artifact

Protocols for giving deep feedback on a single piece of work, such as the Tuning Protocol or other Protocols
for Critique and Feedback including Praise, Question, Suggestion, are typically more useful in later stages,
providing feedback to inform final revisions. These are interactive activities where students present their
work and receive verbal feedback immediately. They are usually done in small groups where each student
takes a turn presenting and receiving feedback.
Choosing and Implementing Protocols

Determine the protocol that best fits the students and the products to be
critiqued.
Utilize peer critique at all stages of the project. At the beginning, focus on big ideas. As students’ work
products progress, narrow the focus, providing specific prompts to help students consider and refine de-
tails.

Critique protocols can be as simple or complex as you choose. When critique is first introduced to your
students, use protocols with fewer steps and simple directions.
Provide prompts to guide the students in their critique. Further support them with sentence starters so that
their feedback is as targeted as you want it.
Protocols can be modified to fit your students and their work products. You can even ask them how they
would like to modify a protocol to fit their needs.
Consider how you will group students. Depending on your students and the work, pairs, trios, or larger
groups might be appropriate.
Set expectations for participation in the critique protocol.

This is an opportunity to reinforce and utilize the norms that the class has agreed upon. If the norms haven’t
been posted in the room, now is the time to get them up.
Consider using collaboration and communication rubrics to help set expectations. Be sure to choose one
that is age appropriate and allows your students sufficient time to analyze it and pose any questions they
might have.
Ron Berger’s “Story of Austin’s Butterfly” video is an excellent introduction to critique for everyone—kin-
dergarten to adult. Watch this with your students and discuss the norms that made peer critique successful.
From there, choose your critique norms and come to consensus as a class.
Simple norms, as seen in Austin’s butterfly video, for providing high quality peer critique can be boiled
down to the following:
Be kind.
Be helpful.
Be specific.
Though simple, these are not necessarily easy, so be sure to discuss examples and counterexamples and to
model what kind, helpful, and specific feedback sounds like.
Introduce the protocol to your students.

One way to present a protocol is through a fishbowl activity (see online variation). In a fishbowl activity,
the teacher facilitates as a small group of students runs through all the steps of the protocol, modeling the
participation that is expected while the rest of the class observes. Fishbowls can be abbreviated time-wise
since the intent is to model the process rather than dive deep into students’ work.

Another way to present a protocol is through a whole class critique of a work sample created by the teacher
or a student work sample from the previous year. Using an anonymous work sample from the previous year
allows students to be critical without worrying about the feelings of the work’s creator. Providing feedback
as a whole class also normalizes the depth and quality of feedback that is expected.
+TIP for Remote and Hybrid Classroom

Because it’s more challenging to monitor a virtual gallery walk in real time and ensure all students’
work is receiving adequate descriptive feedback, be sure to use a structured critique process. For
example, you might require each student to add at least one comment to every work sample in the
gallery. Another method is to make a list of student work and have each student provide detailed
warm and cool feedback on the three items listed below theirs.
Facilitate the protocol.

Unless you have a deeply ingrained culture of critique and highly independent students, you will run the
protocol by introducing each step, providing prompts when appropriate, and keeping time.
Keep the protocol accessible and visible to students, so they can follow along and refer to it when necessary.
Making a timer visible to students by projecting it on a screen helps students regulate the depth and speed
to which they share ideas.
Support student engagement by providing a graphic organizer for analyzing work, gathering thoughts, and
receiving feedback.
For gallery walks where students’ work stands alone with no verbal explanation from the creator, students
might provide their feedback on a blank sheet of paper next to the work or on sticky notes. Remember to
determine if feedback will be anonymous or not and adjust accordingly.

+TIP for Remote and Hybrid Classroom

Structure the process to ensure that every student’s/team’s work is shared and receives feedback.
For example, you might create a hyperdoc with links to each team’s project, assign each student/
team a specific slide in a shared slidedeck like Google Slides, or have each student/team post their
work to a designated Flipgrid or Padlet wall. Students can provide peer feedback by adding typed/
audio comments in SeeSaw or using Kaizena on Google Docs and Slides or by recording video
comments in Canvas or Schoology or using Flipgrid.
Given the conversational nature of protocols for giving in-depth feedback on a single piece of work, take
advantage of in-person classes in a hybrid learning model when possible. Students can also participate in
peer critique sessions via video conferencing if you leverage the breakout rooms or schedule individual
small group meetings. Be sure students are able to present their work to their peers using a screen sharing
tool or by posting it online and sharing a link. If you have multiple groups engaging in the protocol si-
multaneously, it’s important to model the process first and show students how to use a digital timer or use
broadcast messages to guide them through the steps and timing of the protocol.
Review the feedback.

Students sift through and organize the feedback they received either individually or in teams. Upon digest-
ing the feedback, students consider the changes they need to make in their work product and write down
their next steps.
“Next steps” can be part of any graphic organizer that was used during the critique protocol.
When submitting their next draft of this work product, have students highlight where their work has
changed based on the feedback received. If students choose to ignore any feedback, require that they ex-
plain why it was not actionable.

Debrief the protocol with students.

The debrief is more about how the process went rather than the specific feedback received. Ask students to
share how the protocol was or was not helpful, ways they would change the process for next time, and how
participation could be improved. Have students reflect on how they can improve in terms of giving effec-
tive feedback and upholding the established norms. Make sure the peer critique norms and collaboration
rubrics are at the center of the discussion.
Helpful Hints
Troubleshooting Tips
Students don’t provide helpful or high quality feedback.

Begin by revisiting the established critique norms and modeling high quality. You can also hold students ac-
countable to the quality of the feedback they provide through formal assessment. This means you will need
to create a system for collecting and reviewing the feedback students are giving their peers. Be clear with
students about the criteria you’re using in assessing the quality of their feedback. Co-creating a rubric or set
of criteria for high quality feedback can help guide student comments and can help you assess their critique.
Students feel like they need to accept all the feedback they’ve been given.
A way to help students be more open to receiving feedback is to let them know that they get to choose what
to do with the feedback they receive. It is their (or their team’s) project, and their decision whether or not to
and how to implement the feedback. The process of giving and receiving feedback is meant to be supportive
and generative. Because not all feedback will be high quality—some of it might not be relevant, or a sugges-
tion might take the work in a direction different than intended—not all feedback is equally actionable. It is,
however, important to encourage students to consider all the feedback they receive even if they choose not
to follow it.

Critique Protocols Strategy Guide - PBLWorks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Critique Protocols Strategy Guide - PBLWorks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Critique Protocols Strategy Guide - PBLWorks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STRATEGY GUIDE

© 2020 Buck Institute for Education www.pblworks.org 1

Understanding the Two Major Types of Critique

High-Level Feedback on Multiple Artifacts

Deep Feedback on a Single Artifact

Choosing and Implementing Protocols

© 2020 Buck Institute for Education www.pblworks.org 2

Set expectations for participation in the critique protocol.

Introduce the protocol to your students.

© 2020 Buck Institute for Education www.pblworks.org 3

+TIP for Remote and Hybrid Classroom

Facilitate the protocol.

© 2020 Buck Institute for Education www.pblworks.org 4

+TIP for Remote and Hybrid Classroom

Review the feedback.

© 2020 Buck Institute for Education www.pblworks.org 5

Debrief the protocol with students.

Students don’t provide helpful or high quality feedback.

© 2020 Buck Institute for Education www.pblworks.org 6

You might also like