Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T22:52:23.299Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

15 - Technology-Enhanced Feedback

from Part III - Contexts and Sources of Feedback

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2018

By
Cassim Munshi  and
Christopher C. Deneen
Edited by
Anastasiya A. Lipnevich  and
Jeffrey K. Smith
Anastasiya A. Lipnevich
Affiliation:
Queens College and the Graduate Center, City University of New York
Jeffrey K. Smith
Affiliation:
University of Otago, New Zealand
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Instructional Feedback , pp. 335 - 356
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Attali, Y. (2004). Exploring the feedback and revision features of Criterion. National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Attali, Y., & Burstein, J. (2006). Automated essay scoring with e-rater® V. 2. Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 4(3).Google Scholar
Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1993). The word processor as an instructional tool: A meta-analysis of word processing in writing instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 69–93.Google Scholar
Barry, S. (2012). A video recording and viewing protocol for student group presentations: Assisting self-assessment through a Wiki environment. Computers & Education, 59(3), 855–860.Google Scholar
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappa, 92(1), 81–90.Google Scholar
Burrows, S., & Shortis, M. (2011). An evaluation of semi-automated, collaborative marking and feedback systems: Academic staff perspectives. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(7), 1135–1154.Google Scholar
Burstein, J., Kukich, K., Wolff, S., Lu, C., Chodorow, M., Braden-Harder, L., & Harris, M. D. (1998, August). Automated scoring using a hybrid feature identification technique. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, vol. 1 (pp. 206–210). Montreal: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Cann, A. (2014). Engaging students with audio feedback. Bioscience Education, 22(1), 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chodorow, M., Gamon, M., & Tetreault, J. (2010). The utility of article and preposition error correction systems for English language learners: Feedback and assessment. Language Testing, 27(3), 419–436.Google Scholar
Cochran-Smith, M. (1991). Word processing and writing in elementary classrooms: A critical review of related literature. Review of Educational Research, 61, 107–155.Google Scholar
Coll, C., Rochera, M. J., de Gispert, I., & Barriga, F. D. (2013). Distribution of feedback among teacher and students in online collaborative learning in small groups. Digital Education Review, 23, 27–45.Google Scholar
Crook, A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson, C., Drinkwater, R., Lundqvist, K., … & Park, J. (2012). The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students? Computers & Education, 58(1), 386–396.Google Scholar
Deneen, C. C., Brown, G. T. L., & Carless, D. (2017). Students’ conceptions of eportfolios as assessment and technology. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–10. Online prepublication, retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2017.1281752.Google Scholar
Deneen, C. C., & Shroff, R. (2014). Understanding successes and difficulties in program-level eportfolios: A case study of two professional degree programs. Review of Higher Education and Self-Learning, 7(24), 145–160.Google Scholar
Dikli, S. (2006). An overview of automated scoring of essays. Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment, 5(1).Google Scholar
Fink, A. (2005). Conducting research literature reviews: From the Internet to paper. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A., Russell, M., & Cook, A. (2003). The effect of computers on student writing: A meta-analysis of studies from 1992 to 2002. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 2(1).Google Scholar
Gomez, S., Andersson, H., Park, J., Maw, S., Crook, A., & Orsmond, P. (2013). A digital ecosystems model of assessment feedback on student learning. Higher Education Studies, 3(2), 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, C. J., Könings, K. D., Molyneux, A., Schuwirth, L. W., Wass, V., & van der Vleuten, C. P. (2013). Web‐based feedback after summative assessment: How do students engage? Medical Education, 47(7), 734–744.Google Scholar
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.Google Scholar
Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2014). Technology enhanced feedback on assessment. In Australian Computers in Education Conference, Adelaide, SA, September 30–October 3, 2014 (pp. 1–11). Retrieved from http://acec2014.acce.edu.au/session/technology- enhanced- feedback-assessment.Google Scholar
Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51–66.Google Scholar
Hennessy, C., & Forrester, G. (2014). Developing a framework for effective audio feedback: A case study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 777–789.Google Scholar
Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin, H. J., & Thorpe, L. (2011). Using technology to encourage student engagement with feedback: A literature review. Research in Learning Technology, 19(2), 117–127.Google Scholar
Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2014). Peer versus expert feedback: An investigation of the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students. Computers & Education, 71, 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, H. T. D., & Hung, S. T. A. (2013). Exploring the utility of a video‐based online EFL discussion forum. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), E90–E94.Google Scholar
Irwin, B., Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Parkin, H. J., & Thorpe, L. (2013). Engaging students with feedback through adaptive release. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 50(1), 51–61.Google Scholar
Jackson, M., & Marks, L. (2016). Improving the effectiveness of feedback by use of assessed reflections and withholding of grades. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(4), 532–547.Google Scholar
Jordan, S. (2012). Student engagement with assessment and feedback: Some lessons from short-answer free-text e-assessment questions. Computers & Education, 58(2), 818–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, S. (2013). E-assessment: Past, present and future. New Directions, 9(1), 87–106.Google Scholar
Jordan, S., & Mitchell, T. (2009). e‐Assessment for learning? The potential of short answer free text questions with tailored feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2), 371–385.Google Scholar
Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2015). An interactive peer-assessment criteria development approach to improving students’ art design performance using handheld devices. Computers & Education, 85, 149–159.Google Scholar
Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2008). Response to assessment feedback: The effects of grades, praise, and source of information. ETS Research Report Series, 2008(1).Google Scholar
Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2009). Effects of differential feedback on students’ examination performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15(4), 319.Google ScholarPubMed
Marriott, P., & Teoh, L. K. (2012). Using screencasts to enhance assessment feedback: Students’ perceptions and preferences. Accounting Education, 21(6), 583–598.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (2015). Evaluating written, audio and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 153–169.Google Scholar
Narciss, S., Sosnovsky, S., Schnaubert, L., Andrès, E., Eichelmann, A., Goguadze, G., & Melis, E. (2014). Exploring feedback and student characteristics relevant for personalizing feedback strategies. Computers & Education, 71, 56–76.Google Scholar
Nicol, D. (2007). E-assessment by design: Using multiple‐choice tests to good effect. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 31(1), 53–64.Google Scholar
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, D. J., & Milligan, C. (2006). Rethinking technology-supported assessment in terms of the seven principles of good feedback practice. In Bryan, C. and Clegg, K. (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 64–77). London: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Nino, M., & Evans, M. A. (2015). Fostering 21st-century skills in constructivist engineering classrooms with digital game-based learning. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, 10(3), 143–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkin, H. J., Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., & Thorpe, L. (2012). A role for technology in enhancing students’ engagement with feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(8), 963–973.Google Scholar
Phillips, M., Henderson, M., & Ryan, T. (2016). Multimodal feedback is not always clearer, more useful or satisfying. In Barker, S., Dawson, S., Pardo, A., & Colvin, C. (Eds.), Show me the learning: Proceedings ASCILITE 2016 Adelaide (pp. 512–522).Google Scholar
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.Google Scholar
Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Shermis, M. D., Burstein, J., & Bursky, S. A. (2013). Introduction to automated essay evaluation. In Shermis, M. D., Burstein, J., & Bursky, S. A. (Eds.), Handbook of automated essay evaluation: Current applications and new directions (pp. 1–15). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shroff, R. H., & Deneen, C. C. (2011). Assessing online textual feedback to support student intrinsic motivation using a collaborative text-based dialogue system: A qualitative study. International Journal on E-Learning, 10(1), 87–104.Google Scholar
Shute, V., & Towle, B. (2003). Adaptive e-learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(2), 105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shute, V. J. (2011). Stealth assessment in computer-based games to support learning. Computer Games and Instruction, 55(2), 503–524.Google Scholar
Shute, V. J., & Ke, F. (2012). Games, learning, and assessment. In Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 43–58). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Timmers, C. F., Braber-Van Den Broek, J., & Van Den Berg, S. M. (2013). Motivational beliefs, student effort, and feedback behaviour in computer-based formative assessment. Computers & Education, 60(1), 25–31.Google Scholar
Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Van Gog, T. (2004). Reflection prompts and tutor feedback in a web-based learning environment: Effects on students’ self-regulated learning competence. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4), 551–567.Google Scholar
Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C., & Eggen, T. J. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511.Google Scholar
Warschauer, M., & Ware, P. (2006). Automated writing evaluation: Defining the classroom research agenda. Language Teaching Research, 10(2), 157–180.Google Scholar
West, J., & Turner, W. (2016). Enhancing the assessment experience: Improving student perceptions, engagement and understanding using online video feedback. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(4), 400–410.Google Scholar
Yuan, J., & Kim, C. (2015). Effective feedback design using free technologies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 52(3), 408–434.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×