Insights and resources to support better data analysis in education
By Andrew Carlin
Students often do not engage with feedback, with many feeling feedback is not useful and not helpful in improving their learning. It has been documented [2-7] that feedback should meet the following 5 objectives:
However, only 10% of students have been found to seek feedback. Generally, those who seek feedback did so due to a deficit between their expected grade and their achieved grade. Additionally, feedback often comes too late to be considered useful, especially when only end-of-term assessments are deployed. Also of importance is the increasing number of students in classes and the use of digital technologies, resulting in increased student loneliness and other negative physiological side-effects.
One methodology considered to improve feedback and the sense of community is changing the communication channel. Audio and video feedback have been compared in to traditional written feedback. One study allowed students to choose which feedback channel they wanted and gave feedback both on the first and final draft of work. Students receiving written feedback were given a document with comments on their VLE, while audio and video feedback was communicated via audio and video files respectively.
Such a change has been found to improve students' learning and perception of the quality of feedback. In particular, video feedback was found to be significantly more useful than written feedback, while audio was only marginally perceived as better. Students felt that video feedback:
The design and implementation of a video-based feedback system does come with its own caveats.
Feedback channels should consider:
In addition, feedback should be given at a useful stage during the semester, so students can implement appropriate actions based upon the feedback.
[Source Paper] Espasa, Anna, Mayordomo, Rosa M, Guasch, Teresa, and Martinez-Melo, Montserrat. "Does the Type of Feedback Channel Used in Online Learning Environments Matter? Students’ Perceptions and Impact on Learning." Active Learning in Higher Education (2019).
 Chalmers, Charlotte, Mowat, Elaine, and Chapman, Maggie. "Marking and Providing Feedback Face-to-face: Staff and Student Perspectives." Active Learning in Higher Education 19.1 (2018): 35-45
 Mason, J, Brunning, R (2001) Providing Feedback in Computer-Based Instruction: What the Research Tells Us.
Available at: Research Gate
 Narciss, S, Huth, K (2002) How to design informative tutoring feedback for multi-media learning. In: Niegemann, HM, Leutner, D, Brünken, R (eds) Instructional Design for Multimedia Learning. Münster: Waxmann, pp. 181–95.
Available at: Research Gate
 Nicol, D, Macfarlane-Dick, D (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education 31(2): 199–218.
 Boud, D, Molloy, E (2013) Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(6): 698–712
 Price, M, Handley, K, Millar, J (2011) Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education 36(8): 879–96
 Carless, D (2015) Excellence in University Assessment: Learning from Award-Winning Practice. London: Routledge.