An analytical review of the literature on e-feedback

1,541 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,541
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

An analytical review of the literature on e-feedback

  1. 1. AN ANALYTIC REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON E-FEEDBACK Andrea Neville Education 6610, Memorial University Fall 2010
  2. 2. Feedback 2,6,9
  3. 3. E-Feedback 1,9
  4. 4. Selection Criteria Inclusion Exclusion Keywords: feedback or assessment - An indication the feedback was delivered through online media (computer-based, online) Tool focused Empirical (experimental, case study, interviews, surveys) Literature review, position paper or editorial Education participant group Medical or workplace participant group Formative (relating to improving students work) Summative (evaluation for grading) Feedback from instructors/tutors/system Peer Feedback
  5. 5. Open Access Not Open Access Australasian Journal of Educational Technology Butchart, Forster, Gold, Bigelow, Korb, Oppy & Serrenti (2009) Computers in the Schools Economides (2009) International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning Chang (2010) Learning, Media and Technology Gill & Greenhow (2008) Walker, Topping & Rodrigues (2008) Electronic Journal of e-learning Egan, Jefferies, Johal & Loomes (2006) Hatziapostolou & Paraskakis (2010) Lilley & Barker (2007) British Journal of Educational Technology Jordan & Mitchell (2009) Nix & Wyllie (2009) Journal of Online Learning & Teaching Pyke & Sherlock (2010) Alt-J Research in Learning Technology Whitelock, Watt, Raw & Moreale (2003) International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning Yousefzadeh (2010) Computers & Education Yeh & Lo (2009) Educational Technology & Society Heinrich, Milne & Moore (2009)
  6. 6. Methods Data collection methods Data analysis methods Survey Statistical descriptions (mean, standard deviation) Interviews T-test Document analysis Classification of actions Log of actions Comparison of factors Video tape of actions Frequency counts Talk alouds Document analysis Discussion forum Thematic coding Test (pre, post, placement, unit, exam)
  7. 7. Process of analysis
  8. 8. Themes identified
  9. 9. Acceptance of e-feedback
  10. 10. Type and frequency of e-feedback
  11. 11. Staff preferences for e-feedback
  12. 12. Reasons to use e-feedback
  13. 13. Motivation to participate in e-feedback
  14. 14. Student performance after e-feedback
  15. 15. Cautions for integration of e-feedback
  16. 16. Discussion
  17. 17. Conclusions
  18. 18. Implications
  19. 19. Limitations
  20. 20. References <ul><li>1. Butchart, S., Forster, D., Gold, I., Bigelow, J., Korb, K., Oppy, G., & Serrenti, A. (2009). Improving critical thinking using web based argument mapping exercises with automated feedback. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 25 (2), 268-291. </li></ul><ul><li>2. Chang, N. (2010). Can students improve learning with their use of an instructor's extensive feedback assessment process? International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning , (May 2009), 1-15. </li></ul><ul><li>3. Economides, A. (2009). Conative feedback in computer-based assessment. Computers in the Schools , 26 (3), 207-223. doi: 10.1080/07380560903095188. </li></ul><ul><li>4. Egan, C., Jefferies, A., Johal, J., & Loomes, M. (2006). Providing fine-grained feedback within an on-line learning system–Identifying the workers from the lurkers and the shirkers. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning , 4 (1), 115. Academic Conferences Limited. </li></ul>
  21. 21. References <ul><li>5. Gill, M., & Greenhow, M. (2008). How effective is feedback in Computer-Aided Assessments? Learning, Media and Technology , 33 (3), 207-220. doi: 10.1080/17439880802324145. </li></ul><ul><li>6. Hatziapostolou, T., & Paraskakis, I. (2010). Enhancing the impact of formative feedback on student learning through an online feedback system. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning , 8 (2), 111–122. Retrieved from http://www.ejel.org/Volume-8/v8-i2/Hatziapostolou_and_Paraskakis.pdf. </li></ul><ul><li>7. Heinrich, E., Milne, J., & Moore, M. (2009). An investigation into e-tool use for formative assignment assessment–status and recommendations. Educational Technology & Society , 12 (4), 176–192. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/12_4/16.pdf. </li></ul>
  22. 22. References <ul><li>8. Jordan, S., & Mitchell, T. (2009). e-Assessment for learning? The potential of short-answer free-text questions with tailored feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology , 40 (2), 371-385. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00928.x. </li></ul><ul><li>9. Lilley, M., & Barker, T. (2007). Students’ perceived usefulness of formative feedback for a computer-adaptive test. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning , 5 (1), 31-38. </li></ul><ul><li>10. Nix, I., & Wyllie, A. (2009). Exploring design features to enhance computer-based assessment: Learners' views on using a confidence-indicator tool and computer-based feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology . doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00992.x. </li></ul>
  23. 23. References <ul><li>11. Pyke, J., & Sherlock, J. (2010). A closer look at instructor-student feedback online: A case study analysis of the types and frequency. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching , 6 (1), 110-121. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no1/pyke_0310.htm. </li></ul><ul><li>12. Walker, D., Topping, K., & Rodrigues, S. (2008). Student reflections on formative e-assessment: expectations and perceptions. Learning, Media and Technology , 33 (3), 221-234. doi: 10.1080/17439880802324178. </li></ul><ul><li>13. Whitelock, D., Watt, S., Raw, Y., & Moreale, E. (2003). Analysing tutor feedback to students: First steps towards constructing an electronic monitoring system. Alt-J Research in Learning Technology , 11 (3), 31-42. doi: 10.1080/0968776030110304. </li></ul>
  24. 24. References <ul><li>14. Yeh, S., & Lo, J. (2009). Using online annotations to support error correction and corrective feedback. Computers & Education , 52 (4), 882-892. Elsevier Ltd. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.014. </li></ul><ul><li>15. Yousefzadeh, M. (2010). Computer–based feedback vs. instructor–provided feedback and second language learners' reading comprehension. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning , (July), 1-13. </li></ul>

×