Investigating the Dialogic Feedback process using Kaizena

1. Investigating the Dialogic Feedback
process using Kaizena
Manuel Herrera
MA in ELT with ICT & MM
The University of Warwick

2. Personal Information
MA in ELT with ICT & MM
Twitter: @ManuelHerreraM
learnenglish2gether.wordpress.com
manuel.herrera.m@gmail.com

3. Background information
• Feedback is considered “one of the most powerful influences
in learning” (Hattie, 2007, p.1)
• Current practices of providing feedback are no longer effective
(Hepplestone et al., 2009, p. 2).
• Teachers often have a sense that they are not making use of
its full potential (Hyland and Hyland, 2006, p. 1).
• Lack and availability of feedback is criticized by students (Boud
& Molloy, 2013)

4. Much of this dissatisfaction happens in the context of written feedback
“impoverished dialogue” (Nicol, 2010, p. 501).
Problem with written feedback:
• Time-consuming
• Difficult to understand
• Exhausting task for staff. (Bloxham & Boyd, 2007; Higgins et al.,
2002).
Challenge to increase the dialogue:
• Increased class sizes
• Resource constraints
• Staff workload (Orsmond et at., 2013, p. 243)

5. Research objectives
The aim is to look at how to make podcasting processes more dialogic.
The research objectives are:
(1) to identify how podcasting and the cover letter can facilitate
dialogue,
(2) to evaluate how the Cover Letter encourages students to participate
in it and
(3) to formulate a framework for using audio feedback as a dialogic
process.

6. Audio feedback
“aids the gaining and sharing of knowledge and can facilitate discussions
between students and tutors” (Orsmond et al., 2013, p. 243).
It is not a new phenomenon
It can:
• improve students’ experience of receiving it (Merry & Orsmond,
2008),
• feeling more personalised (King, McGugan, and Bunyan 2008),
• reduce time, as it is more efficient, and also
• reduce costs as being cheaper (Hennessy & Forrester, 2014).

7. Audio feedback challenges
Feedback should be a dialogue, not only transmission of
information (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, 2006)
Feedback must trigger inner dialogue in students’ minds (Nicol,
2010, p. 504).
Audio feedback, it is still in most cases a monologue, and it is
difficult for students to reply
Being a separate file from the written paper is another drawback
of the audio feedback

8. Towards a dialogic feedback
process
• There is a growing interest in how technology can enhance the
feedback process.
• Different experiences: audio, video, screencasts and e-feedback
• It is not only the technology that it is used to give feedback
• There is little evidence of how to design and implement such
feedback
• This investigation proposes two possible solutions to address this
problem that are the use of a Cover Letter and Kaizena.

9. Summary of audio feedback
problems
• Podcasting is still a monologue.
• It is in most cases a separate file.
• it is not on the same assignment page.
• it is still hard to students to reply.
• There are limitations with the software to create the file.
• It is separated from the paper.
• It is also hard for students to focus on the feedback given by
their teachers.

10. Kaizena
Kaizena helps in making the audio feedback process more simple and
easy to do:
• Audio comments can be added directly to the page.
• They are recorded and kept on the cloud.
• They will be available to access online.
• With the highlighting tool, the students can focus their attention
where the teacher has pointed out
• Students can reply using the same application on the same page
• Could enable the feedback dialogue process to take place.
https://kaizena.com/

11. Video tutorials: Kaizena
“Creating a Gmail account: a tutorial for students and
teachers”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d3n4xF05z4
“How to use Kaizena”, teacher’s version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9bloTyGHAc
“How to use Kaizena”, students’ version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nRMD1tMxSU

12. The Cover Sheet
• “Students can prompt dialogue on the issues of
importance to them” (Bloxham & Campbell, 2010, p. 4)
• They might identify different areas they would likely
need some help (McKeachie (2002)
• Students requesting feedback “empowers them more
than just receiving feedback” (Nicol, 2010, p. 507)
• Cover sheet example: https://goo.gl/3gn0aG

13. Research Methods
This case study took place in a private and successful primary and
secondary school in Chile
There is a total of 45 students divided into four groups:
• Tercero Medio PET: 11 students.
• Tercero Medio FCE: 11 students.
• Cuarto Medio PET: 11 students.
• Cuarto Medio FCE: 12 students.
Two English teachers are in charge of the groups. One of them is in
charge of the PET group and the other of the FCE one.

14. A pilot study was made with the teachers using Kaizena
podcasting too
Teachers experienced the use of the application in the role
of teacher and of student.
The Cover Letter was designed based on (Bloxham &
Campbell, 2010; Elbow & Sorcinelli, 2010;) together with the
teachers of the school.
The students were shown the letter and video tutorials of
Kaizena in classes to solve their doubts and help them to
understand the use of them.

15. The main aim of this research is to look at how to make the podcasting
process more dialogic.
Providing this framework (Cover Letter + Kaizena podcasting), and
encouraging both teachers and students to ask and reply using the
solutions.
Questionnaire, Interviews and analysis of the interactions were done.

16. Findings and discussion
Both teachers preferred audio feedback after the case study took place.
However, the great majority of the students chose face-to-face (oral) feedback as their main preference
79% of the students reported not asking for clarification
Both teachers describe the podcasting tool to be a faster experience than written feedback
Teachers expressed the Cover Sheet is a good way to focus and guide the feedback process on what the
students wanted
Students also reported that the Cover Sheet helped them to let the teachers focus on what they want
Students mention the importance of having feedback on the same page or document

17. 79% students reported this framework could
enhance the feedback as a dialogue
79%
18%
4%
Can this framework enhanced the feedback as a dialogue?
Yes Maybe No

18. Limitations
written feedback is still the dominant form of
providing students their feedback

19. Conclusion
Objective 1: to identify how podcasting and the cover letter can facilitate dialogue
The combination of both solutions can assure the initiation of an in deep conversation, one that could
lead to a more engaged and frankly dialogue between teachers and students
Objective 2: to evaluate how the Cover Letter encourages students to participate in the
dialogue
It gives the students the necessary tools and alignments to request feedback and promotes further
interactions.
Objective 3: to formulate a framework for using audio feedback as a dialogic process
Both tools used in combination might encourage feedback as dialogue, also that it could enhance the
feedback and it is necessary to be used under a learner-centred approach of learning. However, context
and feedback culture of the institution must be taken into consideration.

20. Recommendations for future
research
• A different combination of some kinds of feedback, for example, written and audio
feedback, with a cover letter and analyse the different interactions of both solutions.
• The culture of feedback of the institution(s) or context in which the research would
take place
• The capabilities of Kaizena not only as podcasting tool to provide feedback, but as a
learning tools to improve the four skills of the English language learning (Listening,
Speaking, Reading and Writing) in an online/blended learning environment.
• The general improvements of the students’ progress in Writing after participating on a
dialogic feedback experience

21. Thank you very much!

22. ReferencesBloxham, S., & Campbell, L. (2010). Generating dialogue in assessment feedback: Exploring the use of interactive cover sheets. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 291-300.
Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 38(6), 698-712.
Elbow, P., and M.D. Sorcinelli. (2010). How to enhance learning by using high-stakes and low-stakes writing. In McKeachie’s teachng tips, ed. W.J.
McKeachie and M. Svinicki, 213–234. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hepplestone, S., Parkin, H., Holden, G., Irwin, B., & Thorpe, L. (2009). Technology, Feedback, Action!: The impact of learning technology upon
students' engagement with their feedback. A Word In Your Ear, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK, 18.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language teaching, 39(02), 83-101.
Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 35(5), 501-517.
Nicol, D. J., & 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.
McKeachie, W. J., & Hofer, B. K. (2002). McKeachie's teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Co.
Orsmond, P., Maw, S. J., Park, J. R., Gomez, S., & Crook, A. C. (2013). Moving feedback forward: theory to practice. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 38(2), 240-252.