Using screen capture software to create feedback videos for students is creating substantial interest in the educational community. In this presentation, Michelle will outline the basics of creating feedback videos and explore some of the possibilities of this idea. In addition, Michelle will discuss her research which looks at the impact of video feedback on the wording and content of comments, and how video commentary enhances students' understanding and uptake of feedback.

1. + Beyond written comments: Using video
feedback to improve students’ writing
Michelle Cavaleri
Student Learning Support

2. +
Engaging with feedback
Studies have shown that feedback is often:
 incomprehensible to students due to the language
used
 ambiguous
 not personalised enough to be useful
 not detailed enough
 lacking information on how to improve
(Hyland, 2003; Stannard, 2007; Dube, 2009; Granville & Dison, 2009; Wingate, 2010; Bennett & Nair, 2011; Crook et al. 2012)

3. +
Could the mode of feedback
be part of the problem?

6. +
Video feedback
Studies found that:
 Students prefer video feedback
 Students engage more fully with the video feedback
 It appeals to a number of senses and learning styles
 It is regarded as conversational and social , even though it
is one sided and asynchronous
 It elicits richer, more precise and nuanced feedback
 It allows for more commentary than could reasonably be
written on a student paper, whether by hand or
electronically
(Stannard, 2006; Kerr & McLaughlin, 2008; Brick and Holmes, 2008; Mathisen, 2012; Harper et al., 2012; Vincelette, 2013)

7. +
Video feedback
Students’ perceptions:
 Felt they were getting more input from their teacher
 Felt it was more ‘human’ social, personal and tailor-made
 Felt that the explanations were clearer and more detailed
 Felt feedback was more constructive and most indicated a
stronger sense of knowing what they need to do in the
future
 Felt they captured their teacher’s attention and the teacher
was ‘available’ which was motivating
(Stannard, 2006; Kerr & McLaughlin, 2008; Brick and Holmes, 2008; Mathisen, 2012; Harper et al., 2012; Vincelette, 2013)

8. +
Video feedback
Teachers’ perceptions:
 Felt like comments had more depth and were more
personal
 Found it valuable for explaining complex ideas and for
suggesting strategies
 Found it saved time in the long run , as there was a
significant decrease in follow up meetings and emails
 Felt they had some control over how the student prioritises
aspects of the feedback
(Stannard, 2006; Kerr & McLaughlin, 2008; Brick and Holmes, 2008; Mathisen, 2012; Harper et al., 2012; Vincelette, 2013)

9. +
My study
1. What is the effect of using video feedback in
comparison to written feedback on the comments
given?
2. Does the use of video enhance students’ uptake of
feedback in comparison to written feedback?

10. +
Method
Participants were 12 undergraduate students at the
Australian College of Physical Education (ACPE).
48 student papers (24 pairs) were collected and an
analysis was carried out on:
1. the feedback comments on each student’s first
draft paper
2. the students’ revised drafts based on the
feedback.

11. +
Data collection
Week 3 - 7
Draft of assignment 1 sent to advisor
Written/video feedback given
Revised draft sent to advisor
Week 7 - 12
Draft of assignment 2 sent to advisor
Video/written feedback given
Revised draft sent to advisor
Week 13 Survey completed

12. +
Data analysis
Writing feature
• Lexicon
• Morphology
• Syntax
• Mechanics
• Organisation
• Ideas and content
• Referencing
• Other
Comment type
• Question/ask for
clarification
• Demonstration/
modeling
• Explanation
• Directive
• Encouragement/
praise
• Advice/suggestion
Student response
• Positive change
• Incorrect change
• No change
• Deleted text
Draft 2Draft 1
Adapted from Ferris’ (1997; 2006) categories of commentary

13. +
Results
Total number of comments
368
Average number of written comments per paper
19
Average number of video comments per paper
12

14. +
Feedback according to writing
features

15. +
Feedback according to writing
features
This suggests that there tends to be a greater focus
on form with the written mode of feedback, whereas
the video comments are more likely to respond to
meaning and the logical development of ideas.

16. +
Feedback according to comment
type

17. +
Feedback according to comment
type
These findings suggest that that video feedback may
lead teachers to be less prescriptive when
responding to students and can help teachers to avoid
taking control of student texts.

18. +
Overall student revisions
Positive changes from
written feedback
Positive changes
from video feedback

19. +
Writing feature and student revision
Writing feature Positive change –
written feedback
Positive change –
video feedback
Lexicon 69% 90%
Morphology 100% 100%
Syntax 68% 97%
Mechanics 82% 92%
Organisation 100% 92%
Ideas and content 50% 82%
Referencing 66% 81%
Other 0% 100%
TOTAL 72% 89%

20. +
Writing feature and student revision
Video feedback outperformed written feedback for
comments relating to syntax
Written Video
Positive change 68% 97%
Incorrect change 14% 0%
No change 13% 0%
Deleted text 6% 3%

21. +
Writing feature and student revision
An example of written feedback on a syntax error
leading to ‘incorrect change’:
Draft 1:
Draft 2:

22. +
Writing feature and student revision
An example of video feedback on a syntax error leading
to ‘positive change’:
Draft 1:
“In last part of the sentence here [highlights segment
indicated above] there seems to be a lot of repetition because
you’ve got the word ‘health’ as you can see [highlights each
instance of the word ‘health’] three times so it’s a little bit
repetitive. So perhaps can you try and re-word that a bit?”
Draft 2:

23. +
Writing feature and student revision
The discrepancy in the percentage of ‘positive change’
outcomes could support the claim that a multi-modal
approach to learning is a more effective method of
instruction than a mono-modal approach (cf. Clark &
Mayer, 2008).

24. +
Comment type and student revision
Comment type Positive change –
written feedback
Positive change –
video feedback
Question / asking for
clarification 61% 83%
Demonstration/
modelling 73% 89%
Explanation 73% 92%
Directive 83% 87%
Advice/ suggestion 59% 90%
Other 50% 100%
Total 72% 89%

25. +
Comment type and student revision
Video feedback outperformed written feedback for
comments that gave ‘advice/suggestion’
Written Video
Positive change 59% 90%
Incorrect change 20% 4%
No change 12% 6%
Deleted text 7% 0%

26. +
Comment type and student revision
An example of written feedback giving
‘advice/suggestion’ leading to ‘incorrect change’:
Draft 1:
Draft 2:

27. +
Comment type and student revision
An example of video feedback giving
‘advice/suggestion’ leading to ‘positive change’:
Draft 1:
“This is actually all one sentence [highlights sentence] and as
you can see it’s very long. Try reading it through again and
work out where you need to put a full stop. I mean roughly
your sentences should be about two lines..…Try and keep
them short and straightforward and to the point.”

28. +
Comment type and student revision
An example of video feedback giving
‘advice/suggestion’ leading to ‘positive change’:
Draft 2:

29. +
Comment type and student revision
This suggests that the combined visual-oral approach
to providing advice may better help students to
‘notice’ the gap between their current ability and
required performance and hence increases their
learning (cf. Schmidt, 1990).

30. +
Comment type and student revision
It seems that students are more aware of how to
improve their work with video feedback, leading to
more ‘positive change’ outcomes, and this could be
due to the fact that there are more ‘explanation’
comments.
Students may be more inclined to take up teacher
feedback if it is explained why they need to make the
change as well as how to make the change, and
hence the amount of ‘incorrect change’ and ‘no
change’ responses would decrease.

31. +
Written feedback
Strongly agree
Video feedback
Strongly agree
The quality of the feedback was
excellent.
46% 77%
The feedback was highly
detailed.
39% 69%
I found it easy to use the
comments to fix my work.
46% 85%
I understood all of the comments. 46% 85%
Survey results

32. +
Survey results
1 2 3 4 5
Unmotivated Motivated
6
Written feedback Video feedback
After reading the comments I felt:

33. +
Survey results
1 2 3 4 5
Discouraged Encouraged
6
Written feedback Video feedback
After reading the comments I felt:

34. +
Survey results
1 2 3 4 5
Confused Clear-headed
6
Written feedback Video feedback
After reading the comments I felt:

35. +
Survey results
Written feedback Video feedback
Which do you prefer?

36. +
Student surveys
“They can actually say what they think and give me
advice rather than just writing what the mistakes are.”
“Very helpful cause [sic] you have both the written and
the audio recording which makes it easy to follow and
gives more explanation as to why.”
“The video was more helpful than only the written
feedback as you were told in a simpler way of why
and how the mistake occurred.”

37. +
Student surveys
“It's more interactive and you get more of a descriptive
evaluation of your work. It helps to plant it into your
brain, so the next time the same mistake occurs you
can change it yourself and feel as though you are
progressing.”
“….made it easier than using just the comments, it
was like being in a meeting.”

38. +
Conclusions
 Video feedback lends itself to discourse level
feedback, i.e. comments relating to meaning, text
organisation, and the logical development of ideas.
 A higher percentage of video comments provided
explanation and suggestions and these types of
meaningful comments appeared to lead to
substantive student revisions.

39. +
Conclusions
 Students showed a more active engagement with
the feedback videos, leading to a higher percentage
of ‘positive change’ outcomes on their revised texts.
 Students rated themselves as more motivated,
encouraged and clear-headed after receiving video
feedback compared to after receiving written
feedback
 All students stated that they preferred video
feedback

40. +
Implications and application
These findings may:
 encourage teachers to reflect on their feedback
practices and change the way they give feedback to
support a broader range of learners
 be used to develop guidelines for teachers for using
screen-capture feedback
 promote the use of video feedback in other learning
contexts, as feedback is integral to all students’
learning

41. +
Practicalities
I prefer to use Jing – It’s FREE, very user friendly and
comes with a Screencast account for storing videos online
1. Pre-read the paper and create a minimal cueing
system. This will help you prioritise feedback
2. Select the area of the screen to record and click
“Capture video” and record your video.
3. Press stop button when finished, then click “Share to
screencast.com”
4. Link will be created and stored on your clipboard. Paste
it into an email and send to the student.

42. +
Other ways to provide video
feedback
 Take notes while working through a student’s work.
Create a video that talks through the notes and the
problems/observations on a point by point basis
 Create a video that provides general feedback to the
whole class
 Provide a model answer to a question and comment
on it. Students could use it to reflect on their own
work.

43. +
References
Bennett, L. & Nair, C. S. (2011). Demonstrating quality: Feedback on feedback. Proceedings of the Australian
Quality Forum. Retrieved May 6, 2012, from http://www.auqa.edu.au/files/auqf/paper/paper_b3.pdf
Brick, B. & Holmes, J. (2008). Using screen capture software for student feedback: Towards a methodology.
In D. Kinshuk, J. Sampson, M. Spector, P. Isaías & D. Ifenthaler (Eds.), IADIS International Conference
on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age. IADIS Press publications.
Clark, R. & Mayer, R. (2008). E-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and
designers of multimedia learning (2nd Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Crook, A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson, C., Drinkwater, R., Lundqvist, K., Orsmond, P., Gomez, S. &
Park, J. (2012). The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the
feedback experience for staff and students? Computers and Education, 58, 386-396.
Dube, C.M. (2009). Strategies to improve reflection, self-evaluation and student performance in an academic
literacies module. Paper presented at Australian Association for Research in Education International
education research conference. Canberra, ACT.
Ferris, D. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on students’ revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 315-
339.
Ferris, D. (2006). Does error feedback help student writers? In K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.) Feedback in
second language writing: Contexts and issues. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

44. +
References
Granville, S. & Dison, L. (2009). Making connections through reflection: Writing and feedback in an academic literacy
programme. South African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 27(1), 53-63. doi:
10.1080/10131750701452352
Harper, F., Green, H. & Fernandez-Toro, M. (2012). Evaluating the integration of Jing screencasts in feedback on
written assignments. Published in 15th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning
(ICL)Hyland, D. (2003) Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback, System, 21, 217–230.
Kerr, W. & McLaughlin, P. (2008). The benefit of screen recorded summaries in feedback for work submitted
electronically. Paper presented at 12th Computer Assisted Assessment Conference. Leicestershire, UK:
Loughborough University
Mathisen, P. (2012). Video feedback in higher education - A contribution to improving the quality of written feedback.
Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 7(2), 97-116.Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language
learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158.
Stannard, R. (2006, December 9). The spelling mistake: Scene one, take one. Times Higher Education. Retrieved from
www.timeshighereducation.co.uk
Stannard, R. (2007). Using Screen Capture Software in Student Feedback. Retrieved February 16, 2012 from
http://www.english.heacademy.ac.uk/ explore/publications/casestudies/technology/camtasia.php
Vincelette, E. J. (2013). Video capture for grading: Multimodal feedback and the millennial student. In E. G. Smyth & J.
X. Volker (Eds,), Enhancing instruction with visual media: Utilizing video and lecture capture (pp. 107-127).
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
Wingate, U. (2010). The impact of formative feedback on the development of academic writing. Assessment and
Evaluation in Higher Education. 35(5), 519-533.