Audio and Video Feedback in Online Learning Environments
Updated May 28, 2026
Online feedback can feel distant. Students receive a document, a grade or a short comment through the VLE and are expected to work out what it means. Espasa, Mayordomo, Guasch and Martinez-Melo's study asks whether the feedback channel itself changes how students experience and use feedback.
The question matters because effective feedback is not only about content. It also depends on clarity, timing, trust and dialogue. If students do not understand the comment, or do not feel able to respond, the feedback loop breaks.
What the study shows
The study compared written, audio and video feedback in an online learning environment. Students chose their preferred feedback channel and received feedback on both a first and final draft of their work.
Video feedback was perceived as significantly more useful than written feedback, while audio feedback was only marginally better. Students said video helped them understand the assignment, reflect on their work and see what to improve. They also felt it encouraged interaction and created a stronger sense of closeness with teaching staff.
That sense of closeness is not superficial. In online courses, students can feel isolated from the people assessing them. Seeing or hearing a tutor explain feedback can make the guidance feel more personal and easier to trust.
The study also points to a practical distinction between format and timing. Feedback must arrive early enough for students to act on it. Video feedback at the end of a module may feel warmer, but it still has limited value if there is no next task to improve.
What universities can do with this
Choose the channel to match the feedback need. Written feedback is useful when students need a clear record, precise wording or accessible text. Audio can be efficient for explanation. Video can be especially useful when staff need to talk through a piece of work, show where comments apply and create a stronger sense of connection.
Accessibility should be considered from the start. Video feedback may need captions or transcripts. Some students may prefer written comments because they can review them more easily or because bandwidth is limited. A good feedback policy should allow flexibility rather than assume one format suits everyone.
Workload also matters. Video feedback can save time for some staff and increase it for others. Teams should test the format on selected assignments before scaling it across a programme.
Student voice evidence can help decide where video adds value. Ask whether students understood the feedback, whether it felt personal, whether they could revisit it easily and whether it changed what they did next. Those questions are more useful than asking for a simple preference between formats.
Limits of the evidence
Audio and video feedback are not automatically better. Poorly structured video can be vague, inaccessible or hard to search. The strongest approach is to use richer media where explanation and connection matter, while keeping feedback timely, clear and actionable.
FAQ
Q: Is video feedback always better than written feedback?
A: No. Video can feel more personal and explanatory, but written feedback is easier to scan, quote and revisit. Many courses will need a blend.
Q: What makes video feedback useful?
A: It should be specific, linked to the student's work and delivered early enough for the student to act on it.
Q: What should institutions check before scaling it?
A: Check accessibility, staff workload, student ability to revisit the feedback and whether the format improves action, not only satisfaction.
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