The impact of text versus video communication on instructor feedback in blended courses

Abstract

In this study we examined student and instructor perceptions of text and video feedback in technology integration courses that combined face-to-face with online instruction for teacher candidates. Items from the Feedback Environment Scale (Steelman et al. 2004) were used to measure student perceptions of feedback quality and delivery. Independent sample t tests found no significant difference in perceptions of feedback quality and delivery between students who received video feedback and those who received text. End-of-semester student and instructor interviews identified several differences in the instructors' feedback methods when they were communicating with text as compared to video. In general, students and instructors found that the affordances of text enabled more efficient and organized feedback, while the affordances of video encouraged more supportive and conversational communication. Analysis of actual feedback comments found video comments were longer and more supportive, while text feedback contained more specific critiques. When rating types of feedback, both students and instructors valued the efficiency of text over the more affective benefits of video. The article concludes with possible implications for future research and recommendations for practice that draw on the potential benefits of both feedback forms.

Transforming Feedback: An Application Framework for Group Feedback Videos in Design

“…Videos have been linked to Media Richness Theory (see Henderson & Phillips ; Borup et al . ) proposed by Daft & Lengel (), which suggests that complex issues are best conveyed through rich media to reduce ambiguity. Indeed, even in the work of Henderson & Phillips () that involved assessment of written essays, students were able to gain a richer level of understanding by pairing the verbal comments with non‐verbal cues such as educators’ facial expressions.…”

“…Similarly, in two other studies students reported face‐to‐camera video feedback to be more ‘supportive and friendly’ (Borup et al . , 177) and screencasting video feedback to be ‘community building’ as well as more ‘personal and real’ (Mathieson , 149). Such responses certainly support the notion of relationship development, which becomes ever more important for maintaining a collaborative environment in today's design courses with growing class sizes.…”

“…Borup et al . () had previously made this connection in their work assessing written submissions through individual face‐to‐camera video feedback. They proposed that, on the media richness continuum, videos were closer to a face‐to‐face conversation when compared to written feedback due to their capacity for conveying non‐verbal cues such as body language, facial expression and tone of voice.…”

“…Similar results have been reported in two previous studies where students preferred written over video feedback listing reasons of accessibility, efficiency and conciseness (Borup et al . , 173; Orlando , 162). In both studies, video feedback was delivered in response to written submissions.…”

The Impact of Oral and Written Feedback on EFL Writers With the Use of Screencasts

“…Teacher feedback is probably the most common way to support students during the critical period of application of their recently acquired knowledge, a moment when they lack enough understanding to know if they are executing it correctly (Borup, West, & Thomas, 2015).…”