2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11528-014-0803-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using screen capture feedback to improve academic performance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
26
0
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
2
26
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Moore and Filling found that the majority of student drafts improved significantly from the first to the final draft, and students reported that the video feedback had motivated them to undertake meaningful revisions. However, it is not clear from the study, or that of Denton (2014), whether the quality of students' work benefitted directly from the video format, or simply from the process of receiving Henderson and Phillips (2015) feedback with the opportunity to revise their work prior to final submission. Ali (2016) found that an experimental group of English-language students receiving screencast feedback on the content, organisation and structure of their writing achieved higher mean scores for overall writing, content, organisation and structure than the control group which received written feedback.…”
Section: Video Feedback and Student Learning Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moore and Filling found that the majority of student drafts improved significantly from the first to the final draft, and students reported that the video feedback had motivated them to undertake meaningful revisions. However, it is not clear from the study, or that of Denton (2014), whether the quality of students' work benefitted directly from the video format, or simply from the process of receiving Henderson and Phillips (2015) feedback with the opportunity to revise their work prior to final submission. Ali (2016) found that an experimental group of English-language students receiving screencast feedback on the content, organisation and structure of their writing achieved higher mean scores for overall writing, content, organisation and structure than the control group which received written feedback.…”
Section: Video Feedback and Student Learning Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…De los tipos de evaluación expuestos por Utha (2015), a saber: evaluación sumativa, evaluación continua sumativa o evaluación continua formativa, comienza a expandirse la idea de que si se desea avanzar en la evaluación de competencias no resulta útil una simple evaluación sumativa, o evaluación continua sumativa, pues ambas adolecen de la deseable potencia de la función formativa en la Universidad. Diversos autores coinciden en que la evaluación debería tener un carácter formativo y continuo (Brockbank y Mc-Gill, 2006;Denton, 2014;Ibarra y Rodríguez-Gómez, 2010); asímismo, ratifican que este tipo de evaluación consigue elevar las calificaciones de los estudiantes, en relación a otros itinerarios o modelos de evaluación menos formativos, lo que parece evidenciar un mayor efecto de aprendizaje (Lizandra, Valencia, Atienza y García, 2017). Igualmente, se considera que la evaluación llevada a cabo únicamente por el profesor, heteroevaluación, sería menos coherente con la filosofía de la programación por competencias que la coevaluación, autoevaluación u otras fórmulas de evaluación pactada, negociada y compartida con los estudiantes ( Bain, 2005;Boud y Falchikov, 2007;Brown y Glasner, 1999;López-Pastor, Pintor, Muros, y Webb, 2013).…”
Section: La Evaluación Formativa Como Evaluación De Competenciasunclassified
“…Through using audio-visual media to deliver performance information to students, educators can provide detailed comments to students in a relatively short recording. It is generally argued that it is faster to communicate orally than it is through typing or writing (e.g., D. W. Denton, 2014;Orlando, 2016). Due to this affordance, educators tended to positively appraise the use of audio-visual media to provide performance information.…”
Section: Digital Recordingsmentioning
confidence: 99%