Investigating expectations and experiences of audio and written assignment feedback in first-year undergraduate students

Abstract

Previous research suggests that audio feedback may be an important mechanism for facilitating effective and timely assignment feedback. The present study examined expectations and experiences of audio and written feedback provided through turnitin for iPad® from students within the same cohort and assignment. The results showed that although initially sceptical of audio-compared to written feedback, there were no significant differences in students' experiences of audio and written feedback. Students' performance on the assignment was not associated with their experiences of audio feedback but first class performing students (>70%) had more positive experiences of written feedback than those who received an upper second class grade (60-69%). In general, the results imply that audio feedback provided through turnitin for iPad® is a viable alternative to written feedback. The findings are discussed in relation to past research findings.

Impact of teacher written vs. audio feedback on EFL undergraduates’ writing

“…On the other hand, the results of Fawcett and Oldfield (2016) are contradictory to the results of the above studies as it was found that only the least percentage of students showed positive perception of audio feedback in comparison to written feedback. Moreover, the results show no significant differences in students' perceptions of audio feedback and written feedback.…”

“…Several researchers recommend the use of audio feedback for it is time-efficient (it takes less time in recording it and can be timely, cheap or free and applicable to various written assignments as long as students are familiar with technology use (Hennessy & Forrester, 2014;Lunt & Curran, 2010;Olesova et al, 2011;Rodway-Dyer et al, 2011). Research also provides evidence on students' highly perceived value of audio feedback in comparison to written feedback (Fawcett & Oldfield, 2016;Hennessy & Forrester, 2014;Ice et al, 2010;Rodway-Dyer et al, 2011). Yet, studies on the impact of teacher audio feedback on students' performance in writing that adopt experimental research designs are rare.…”

EFL Lecturers’ Perception and Practice of Screencast Feedback

“…Teacher"s written feedback refers to teacher"s written comments and corrective feedback to enhance students" language proficiency and analysis (Storch & Wigglesworth, 2010). Audio feedback refers to providing feedback on student's work using audio recording (Fawcett & Oldfield, 2016), and electronic feedback refers to providing feedback using a computer (Ware & Warschauer, 2006), such as computer-mediated communication (also see Section 1 for the definition of screencast feedback).…”

Technology and Feedback Design

“…They also perceive recorded comments to be more supportive (Borup et al, 2015;Gould & Day, 2013), personal (Gould & Day, 2013;Knauf, 2016;Mathieson, 2012;West & Turner, 2016), and easy to understand (Bourgault et al, 2013;Turner & West, 2013) than text. On the other hand, some students are initially sceptical about receiving performance information in this way (Fawcett & Oldfield, 2016;Henderson & Phillips, 2015), while others note that text based comments can be more efficient to scan through than digital recordings (Borup et al, 2015;Morris & Chikwa, 2016). This is because it is often necessary to listen to or watch a full recording to find the relevant information.…”