Audio and Video Feedback in Online Learning Environments
Updated Mar 14, 2026
When students do not engage with feedback, the learning loop breaks. In online learning, the format of feedback can shape whether students understand it, act on it, and feel connected enough to respond.
That matters because many students see feedback as too vague, too late, or too detached to help them improve, a pattern explored in the disconnect on what makes good feedback. Research suggests [2-7] that effective feedback should meet five objectives:
- Include informative, elaborative guidance
- Encourage reflection while showing what has been done well and what needs to improve
- Feel useful enough that students can turn it into action and improve their learning
- Promote interaction and dialogue between students and academics
- Build trust, so students feel confident asking questions
However, only 10% of students have been found to seek feedback. In many cases, they do so only when there is a gap between the grade they expected and the grade they received. Feedback also often arrives too late to be useful, especially when students only receive it at the end of term.
At the same time, growing class sizes and heavier use of digital technologies can leave students feeling more isolated. That makes the communication channel itself more important, because it can either reinforce distance or help rebuild a sense of connection.
One way to improve both feedback quality and the sense of community is to change the communication channel. Audio and video feedback have been compared with traditional written feedback. In one study, students chose which feedback channel they preferred and received feedback on both the first and final draft of their work. Students receiving written feedback were given a document with comments on their VLE, while audio and video feedback was delivered through audio and video files.
This shift improved students' learning and their perception of feedback quality. In particular, video feedback was found to be significantly more useful than written feedback, while audio was only perceived as marginally better. Students felt that video feedback:
- Promoted a greater understanding of the assignment
- Improved self-reflection on their work and what to improve
- Made feedback more useful and easier to understand
- Encouraged interaction and dialogue with teaching staff
- Created more of a sense of closeness with teaching staff than audio or written feedback
For online teaching teams, that is the key benefit. Video feedback can clarify the work while also making the relationship with staff feel more human.
The design and implementation of a video-based feedback system does come with its own caveats.
When choosing a feedback channel, consider:
- Degree of personalisation: which channel allows staff to deliver the most personalised feedback?
- Clarity: which channel communicates information most clearly?
- Accessibility: which channel is the most inclusive and practical? For example, written feedback may work better when students do not have reliable internet access
- Sense of closeness: which channel best supports connection with teaching staff?
- Workload: which channel is sustainable for teachers over time?
Timing matters just as much as format. Feedback should be given at a useful point in the semester, so students still have time to act on it, which is the central idea behind feedback and feedforward in UK higher education.
The practical takeaway is clear: if you want feedback to change behaviour, choose a channel that supports clarity, dialogue and trust, then deliver it early enough for students to use it.
FAQ
Q: What specific strategies can be implemented to ensure feedback is given at a useful stage during the semester?
A: Institutions can make feedback more useful by setting clear turnaround expectations, for example returning feedback within one or two weeks of submission. Formative assessments spaced through the semester also help, because students still have time to reflect and adjust their approach before the next task. Student voice initiatives add another benefit: they show whether the feedback timeline feels workable from the student perspective, not just the institutional one.
Q: How can educators encourage students to engage more actively with the feedback provided?
A: Students are more likely to engage with feedback when it feels specific, actionable and relevant to their work. That means highlighting strengths as well as clear next steps, then inviting dialogue through one-to-one conversations or digital follow-up. Bringing student voice into the process can also make feedback feel more personalised and worth acting on.
Q: How can the sense of community be improved in large classes or when using digital technologies for feedback?
A: Improving community in large or digitally mediated classes depends on creating more opportunities for interaction and connection. Collaborative activities, group discussions and peer review feedback can all help students feel less isolated. Personalised audio or video feedback adds another advantage, because it can create a stronger sense of closeness with teaching staff while making guidance easier to understand.
References
[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).
DOI: 10.1177/1469787419891307
[1] 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
DOI: 10.1177/1469787417721363
[2] Mason, J, Brunning, R (2001) Providing Feedback in Computer-Based Instruction: What the Research Tells Us.
Available at: Research Gate
[3] 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
[4] 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.
DOI: 10.1080/03075070600572090
[5] Boud, D, Molloy, E (2013) Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(6): 698–712
DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2012.691462
[6] Price, M, Handley, K, Millar, J (2011) Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher Education 36(8): 879–96
DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2010.483513
[7] Carless, D (2015) Excellence in University Assessment: Learning from Award-Winning Practice. London: Routledge.
ISBN: 9781138824553
Request a walkthrough
Book a free Student Voice Analytics demo
See all-comment coverage, sector benchmarks, and reporting designed for OfS quality and NSS requirements.
- All-comment coverage with HE-tuned taxonomy and sentiment.
- Versioned outputs with TEF-ready reporting.
- Benchmarks and BI-ready exports for boards and Senate.
UK-hosted · No public LLM APIs · Same-day turnaround
Related Entries
- Face-to-Face Feedback
- Feedback and Feedforward in UK Higher Education
- The disconnect on what makes good feedback
- Enhancing Feedback in Higher Education