You are here

Home » Content

Usefulness of feedback in e-learning from the students’ perspective

Journal Name:

  • Intangible Capital

Publication Year:

  • 2015
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.622

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Purpose: Functionality of feedback in pedagogical processes has been broadly analyzed in face-to-face learning, although to a lesser extent than in the on-line learning. Narciss (2004, 2008) distinguishes two dimensions within the feedback, the semantic dimension and the structural dimension. This article aims to analyze, from the student’s perspective, the semantic dimension of feedback in a virtual learning environment (VLE). Firstly, we analyze the importance that VLE students give to feedback and its degree of personalization. Later, the usefulness that students deem feedback should have, paying special attention to each of its semantic subdimensions (Narciss, 2004). Design/methodology/approach: A survey was conducted among students of Business Administration degree of the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC). 182 students took part, separated into two groups (pilot and control). Findings: It has been proved that 90% of students give a great or very great importance to reception of feedback from their tutors, a relevance they consider to be higher than the one within a face-to-face environment. This percentage is around 75% with regard to the importance given to the level of personalization of feedback. The development of a factor analysis has revealed that usefulness of personalized feedback perceived by the students can be subsumed under two large dimensions: the one that facilitates learning (related to its semantic dimension) and the motivational one (by allowing an easier and more fluid communication with the tutor, contributing not to leave the course, etc.) The latter dimension has been also proved to be key in order to attain improvements in the students’ satisfaction with the learning process. This research was funded by the Catalan government and the UOC, within the framework of projects to Improve Teaching Quality (ITQ). Originality/value: Implementing personalized feedback has a relevant impact on the student, who values it because it makes his learning process easier, richer and more significant. Moreover, it has a clear motivational effect over the student, which had not been sufficiently evidenced by other researches. Such effect needs not to be underestimated, particularly within an on-line environment, where dropout rate is usually high.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon 622-3323-1-pb.pdf
  • 4
627
645
  • English

JEL Codes:

REFERENCES

References: 

ÁLVAREZ, I.; ESPASA, A.; GUASCH, T. (2011). The value of feedback in improving collaborative
writing assignments in an online learning environment. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4):
387-400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.510182
BUCHANAN, T. (2000). The efficacy of a World-Wide Web mediated formative assessment.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16: 193-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-
2729.2000.00132.x
DEMPSEY, J.V.; WAGER, S.U. (1988). A taxonomy for the timing of feedback in computer-based
instruction. Educational Technology, 28(10): 20–25.
ESPASA, A. (2008). El Feedback en el marc de la regulació de l’aprenentatge: Caracterització i
anàlisi en un entorn formatiu en línia. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Available online in:
http://www.tdx.cat/browse?value=Espasa+Roca%2C+Anna&type=author
ESPASA, A. (2010). Time factor in e-learning and assessment. eLearnCenter Research Paper
Series, (1). Available online in: http://elcrps.uoc.edu/ojs/index.php/elcrps/article/view/issue1-espasa
GIBBS, G.; SIMPSON, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment support students’
learning. Learning Teaching in High Education, 1: 3-31.
GUASCH, T.; ESPASA, A.; ÁLVAREZ, I. (2010). Formative e-feedback in collaborative writing
assignments: the effect of the process and time. eLC Research Paper Series, 1, 49-59
HYLAND, F. (2001). Providing Effective Support: Investigating feedback to distance language
learners. Open Learning, 16(3): 233-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680510120084959
HYLAND, F. (2003). Focusing on form: Student engagement with teacher feedback. System,
31: 217-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00021-6 KLUGER, A.N.; DENISI, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A
historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.
Psychological Bulletin, 119(2): 254-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
KRAMARSKI, B.; ZEICHNER, O. (2001). Using technology to enhance mathematical reasoning:
Effects of feedback and self-regulation learning. Educational Media International, 38(2-3),
77-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523980110041458
KULHAVY, R.W.; STOCK, W.A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response
certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 279-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01320096
LEY, K. (1999). Providing feedback to distance students. Campus-Wide Information Systems,
16(2): 63-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10650749910272016
MARTÍNEZ, M.J.; JUAN, A.A.; CASTAN, J. (2010). Using the Critical Incident Technique to
Identify Factors of Service Quality in Online Higher Education. International Journal of
Information Systems in the Service Sector, 2(4), 57-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jisss.2010100104
MASON, J.; BRUNNING, R. (2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: what
the resear ch tel l us. University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Available online in:
http://dwb.unl.edu/Edit/MB/MasonBruning.html
MORY, E.D. (2004). Feedback research revisited. Handbook of research on educational
communications and technology, 2: 745-783.
NARCISS, S. (2004). The impact of informative tutoring feedback and self-efficacy on
motivation and achievement in concept learning. Experimental Psychology, 51(3): 214-228.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.51.3.214
NARCISS, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J.M. Spector, M.D.
Merrill, J. Van Merriënboer & M.P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational
Communications and Technology (Aect). New Jersey (EUA): Lawrence Erlbaum.
NARCISS, S.; HUTH, K. (2004). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia
learning. In H.M. Niegemann, R. Brünken & D. Leutner (Eds.), Instructional Design for
Multimedia Learning (pp. 181-195). Münster: Waxmann.
NARCISS, S.; HUTH, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related
tutoring feedback in a computer-based training for written subtraction. Learning and
Instruction, 16(4): 310-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.07.003 NARCISS, S.; KÖRNDLE, H.; REIMANN, G.; MÜLLER, C. (2004). Feedback-seeking and
feedback efficiency in web-based learning– How do they relate to task and learner
characteristics?. In A.P. Gerjets, P.A. Kirschner, J. Elen & R. Joiner (Eds.), Instructional
design for effective and enjoyable computer- supported learning. Proceedings of the first
joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with
Computers (pp. 377-388). Tuebingen: Knowledge Media Research Center.
RICE, M.; MOUSLEY, J.; DAVIS, R. (1994). Improving student feedback in distance education:
a research report. A T. Evans & D. Murphy (Eds.), Research in distance education (pp. 52-
62). Geelong (Australia): Deaking University Press.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com