# Feedback and the Perception of Grades

**URL:** <http://discourse.iapct.org/t/feedback-and-the-perception-of-grades/4334>\
**Category:** CSG1994\
**Created:** [February 23, 1994, 8:00pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/feedback-and-the-perception-of-grades/4334 "1994-02-23T20:00:11Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Richard\_Thurman1](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/48db29/32.png) [@Richard\_Thurman1](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Richard_Thurman1)\
**Post date:** [February 23, 1994, 8:00pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/feedback-and-the-perception-of-grades/4334/1 "1994-02-23T20:00:11Z")

</div>

[From Richard Thurman (940223.1315)]

Rick Marken (940218.0845)

Well... before you scamper back to your clay-like mud to seethe at being  
scolded by all the ST'ers ... before you have time to officially renounce  
all ties with the religious left of PCT ... Before St. Paul recognizes  
one of his kindred and decides to invite you (instead of one of his moile  
friends) over for dinner ... I've still got a question about feedback.

> This misconception occurs because in the phrase "provide feedback" the word  
> "feedback" is being used as a synonym for "perception"; a " grade", for  
> example, is often called "feedback" but it is really a perception. In  
> PCT we recognize that perception is \_always there\_. It is not "provided"  
> by output or by the environment -- it is a VARIALE whose state is  
> influenced by system outputs and environmental variables.

The "grade" example reminded me of the severe public chastisement the  
Tom Hancock received when he posted some information about his  
'feedback' studies last July. Well -- I thought it was severe anyhow.  
I was on vacation and did not feel like responding at the time -- too  
much fishing going on to get real serious. He was finally able to  
resolve things by calling the 'feedback' a piece of 'post response  
information' or something like that. This seemed pretty contrived  
considering we all knew what he was talking about. In instruction and  
in learning -- teachers, coaches, and lovers 'provide feedback' to us  
by telling us how we are doing.

Isn't this type of 'feedback' the same Gary C. and Bill P. were talking  
about last August when they wrote of coaching speed skaters. As I remember,  
they said speed skaters must achieve a very awkward body profile in order to  
skate fast. They must crouch lower and more forward than is comfortable  
(or sane). I believe Bill said that coaching this from a PCT perspective  
would include yelling "Lower" to the skater until he or she achieved the  
perfect position. Then the skater would gradually create and hone a  
perceptual control system that would replace the coach's 'feedback.' (If  
this is not what you said Gary & Bill -- or if it is not what you meant  
-- my apologies. It is what I thought you were saying.)

Isn't this the way teaching and learning works? It seems to me that  
students are not necessarily controlling for learning a particular subject,  
nor are they controlling for learning how to do a particular task.  
Rather, many students are actually controlling for the perception of a  
grade, or for perceiving the coach yelling "Thats It!" In this manner  
the teacher, or coach is part of the feedback function.

Is this coherent? How am I doing? I need some feedback (oops--input)!

Rich

> **···**
>
> --------------------------------------------------  
> Richard Thurman  
> Air Force Armstrong Lab  
> 6001 S. Power Rd. BLDG. 558  
> Mesa AZ. 85206-0904
> 
> (602) 988-6561  
> Thurman@hrlban1.aircrew.asu.edu  
> ---------------------------------------------------

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bill\_Leach1](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/848f3c/32.png) [@Bill\_Leach1](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Bill_Leach1)\
**Post date:** [February 24, 1994, 2:34am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/feedback-and-the-perception-of-grades/4334/2 "1994-02-24T02:34:36Z")

</div>

\<[Bill Leach 940223.18:51 EST(EDT)]

> [Richard Thurman (940223.1315)]

Richard, I'm going to risk a comment here as this is the one area of PCT  
that I think that I understand.

Feedback is a very abused term. It is pressed into service to explain  
(or as part of an explaination) for many things.

In a sense there really is nothing wrong with your example use of the  
term. However, in the purest engineering sense of the term, feedback is  
a portion of the output that is fed back to the input. There are many  
ways in which this might be accomplised and indeed there are various  
reasons why it is done in control systems.

Recognize here though, that the system itself is supplying the feedback  
to itself. This is not an "externally" generated signal. Thus, a  
"sampling of the output" is fed back to the input.

I believe that the term really came into vogue with electronic  
amplifiers. Popularly, the term became familiar when "acoustic feedback"  
occurred in a public address system. Almost everyone calls this  
"feedback" rather than acoustic feedback (even those of us that "know  
better").

I don't personally believe that the term "feedback" has any place in PCT  
unless there is an actual situation where it is determined that a portion  
of the output signal is returned to the input to enhance control.

> From a "Systems Theory" standpoint (as I understand Systems Theory, which

is not a lot), the term "feedback" could probably be used as in your  
examples and be considered to be a correct usage.

-bill

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![\_Martin\_Taylor](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/_/a9adbd/32.png) [@\_Martin\_Taylor](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/_Martin_Taylor)\
**Post date:** [February 24, 1994, 11:25pm UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/feedback-and-the-perception-of-grades/4334/3 "1994-02-24T23:25:02Z")

</div>

\<Martin Taylor 940224 18:20\>

> Bill Leach 940223.18:51

> I don't personally believe that the term "feedback" has any place in PCT  
> unless there is an actual situation where it is determined that a portion  
> of the output signal is returned to the input to enhance control.

Not clear what you mean, here. The essence of PCT is that the output is  
"returned" to the input in all cases of actual behaviour, at least in the  
form of its effects on the perceptual signal. Do you mean something else?

Martin

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bill\_Leach1](http://discourse.iapct.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/848f3c/32.png) [@Bill\_Leach1](http://discourse.iapct.org/u/Bill_Leach1)\
**Post date:** [February 25, 1994, 4:12am UTC](http://discourse.iapct.org/t/feedback-and-the-perception-of-grades/4334/4 "1994-02-25T04:12:52Z")

</div>

\<[Bill Leach 940224.22:55 EST(EDT)]

> \<Martin Taylor 940224 18:20\>

> Not clear what you mean, here. The essence of PCT is that the output is  
> "returned" to the input in all cases of actual behaviour, at least in  
> the form of its effects on the perceptual signal. Do you mean something  
> else?

Yes, absolutely but my posting to Richard should make it clear. If not,  
just ask.

-bill