“Check the grade, log out”: students’ engagement with feedback in learning management systems

Abstract

There is growing recognition that socio-constructivist representations of feedback processes, where students build their own understanding through engaging with and discussing feedback information, are more appropriate than cognitivist transmissionoriented models. In parallel, practice has developed away from hard-copy handwritten or typed feedback comments, towards the provision of e-feedback in Learning Management Systems (LMS). Through thematic analysis of activity-oriented focus groups with 33 Undergraduate students, the present study aimed to explore 1) students' experience of engaging with feedback in the LMS; 2) barriers to students' engagement; and 3) students' perceptions of the potential for technology to ameliorate these barriers. The data reveal particular barriers to engagement created by the LMS environment; grades and feedback are commonly separated spatially, limiting attention to the latter. Additionally, the distributed location of feedback from different tasks limits synthesis of feedback.Nevertheless, students perceived that the LMS environment affords opportunities for addressing such challenges, particularly in relation to the potential for a LMS tool to synthesise feedback information across modules, and to direct students to resources to develop their skills. The findings are discussed in the context of cycles of engagement with feedback, and implications for the principled use of technology in feedback processes are discussed.

A feedback journey: employing a constructivist approach to the development of feedback literacy among health professional learners

“…It is well-known that learners are grade oriented [12]. Therefore, students may have considered this exercise to be of limited academic and personal value, a phenomenon highlighted in previous research [2,23].…”

A dialogic technology-mediated model of feedback uptake and literacy

“…Dialogues mediated by technology may also alleviate issues related to conducting feedback dialogues in 'spaces' or situations that connote unequal power, a barrier to productive student-teacher feedback dialogue described by undergraduate students in Gravett and Winstone (2019). Technology-mediated discussion in the form of comment threads may also help dissipate expectations of formality in student-teacher communication and be perceived as more convenient than generating an email to ask questions which may disincentivise some learners (Winstone et al 2020). Similarly, peers may find it affectively easier to communicate feedback information as a socio-constructivist oriented 'conversation' rather than as one-way 'transmission'.…”

“…Following such standard practices across a university can facilitate continuity and promote the transfer of learning from feedback across modules. However, to encourage use, platforms designed with attention to perceived convenience may be more attractive to users (Winstone et al 2020) which may influence their use . Focus on convenience and utility also aligns with the technology acceptance model (TAM), which provides evidence that perceived ease of use and usefulness are correlated with the acceptance of new technologies in various contexts (Rej on-Guardia, Polo-Peña and Maraver-Tarifa 2020).…”

How does a move towards a coaching approach impact the delivery of written feedback in undergraduate clinical education?

“…These encouraging results lend weight in clinical education to the pairing of both formal and informal learning and development opportunities which support coaching focused feedback practice that enocourage reflection We contend that a focus on coaching in feedback practice, such as that seen here is also increasingly mindful of the learner perspectives and the complex interplay of personality as part of institutional processes and supports dialogues that may encourage feedback uptake (Freeman et al, 2020;Winstone et al, 2017a, b).These coaching dialogues move away from more traditional, educator centric, feedback practices that include vague, descriptive or evaluative feedback that is generally known to have limited usefulness (Bösner et al, 2017;Shaughness et al, 2017). Often technology-mediated methods of feedback delivery can encourage a one-way, transmission approach where learners focus on grade rather than feedback and understanding (Carless & Boud, 2018;Winstone et al, 2020). The practice examined in the current study recognises that written feedback comments delivered by the learning management system are part of a wider approach to feedback.…”

“…Developing understanding surrounding the emotional content of feedback messages, through a coaching approach to feedback, may help to drive changes in feedback practice that will ultimately support learners (Reynolds, 2020;Tripodi et al, 2020) Other barriers that may exist, particularly when learners do not value feedback, or have less effective learning strategies, is feedback accessibility. Learners have reported being overwhelmed with volumes of feedback, particularly when delivered via learning management systems (Winstone et al, 2020). Review evidence indicates differential effects of message length on feedback uptake in medical education domains vary according to task (Ridder et al, 2015).…”