Want to create interactive content? It’s easy in Genially!

Transcript

Video translation (English)
Meta map (DT/ EN)
Feedback taxonomy (English)
Sprache ändern (Deutsch)
Video manual (English)

How to cite this website: Schluer, J. (2023). Digital Feedback Map. https://tinyurl.com/DigitalFeedbackOverview/ Last update: 29/11/2024

CONTACT US

bESCHREIBUNG

description

Jun.-Prof. Dr. Jennifer Schluer

Digital fEEDBACK MAP

Click here for user guide

the book

the author

the project

Start

Overview of digital feedback methods

Home

2.2. Feedback Mode

2.1. Feedback Direction

2.4. Feedback Criteria

2.3. Feedback Timing

2. Overview by Different Filters

1. General Overview

Overview of digital feedback methods

tABLE OF CONTENTS

+Info

Further information:

Dr. Jennifer Schluer is an Assistant Professor for TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages)/ Advanced Academic English at Chemnitz University of Technology, Germany. As an applied linguist and teacher educator, she specializes in digital teaching and digital feedback processes as well as language awareness and culture learning. She is particularly interested in video-based methods and multimodal analyses to derive empirically validated didactic designs. Her most recent book “Digital Feedback Methods” was published by Narr Francke Attempto in 2022.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Knowledge, reflection, application

Encouraging feedback dialoguesin the digital age

Using digital media for individualized learner support

Digitalization of teacher education

The crucial role of feedback in the learning process is undisputed. But how can feedback be exchanged in the digital age? This book equips teachers and learners with a research-based overview of digital feedback methods. This includes, for instance, feedback in text editors, cloud documents, chats, forums, wikis, surveys, mails as well as multimodal feedback in video conferences and recorded audio, video and screencast feedback. The book discusses the advantages and limitations of each digital feedback method and offers suggestions for their practical application in the classroom. They can be utilized in online teaching as well as to enrich on-site teaching. The book also provides ideas for combining different feedback methods synergistically and closes with recommendations for developing dynamic digital feedback literacies among teachers and students.

Schluer, J. (2022). Digital Feedback Methods. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.

ABOUT THE BOOK

Click for list of project publications

Since 2018, Jun.-Prof. Dr. Jennifer Schluer has conducted research on digital feedback. Her initial project focused on the use of screencast feedback in teacher education. Afterwards, she has looked at a wider range of feedback methods as part of the DigiFeed project. For this, she has been granted a Digital Fellowship by the Saxon State Ministry for Higher Education, Research and the Arts (Sächsisches Staatsministerium für Wissenschaft, Kultur und Tourismus, SMWK). DigiFeed stands for “Digital Feedback” and deals with various methods and tools for providing constructive comments on a learner’s work in progress. The overarching aim is to derive recommendations for teachers and students regarding the didactically motivated and meaningful use of digital feedback. In winter term 2021/22, the focus was set on the utilization of digital feedback methods at different stages of the research and academic writing process. From winter term 2022/23 onwards, further contexts of use will be explored that will make this map grow further. This follow-up project has been funded by the Stiftung Innovationen in der Hochschullehre from 09/2022 to 11/2023.

ABOUT THE PROJECT

Click to view the full version of description about the digital feedback map

The "Digital Feedback Map" is a comprehensive interactive tool that unveils the realm of digital feedback methods. It is designed to help teachers and students enhance their teaching and learning experiences. In a world where technology continually evolves, digital feedback methods empower educators and learners alike with novel possibilities for effective communication and growth. Our user-friendly platform, built upon the interactive foundation of Genial.ly, serves as your gateway to understanding, comparing, and selecting the most suitable digital feedback methods for your unique educational context.

Description about the Digital Feedback Map

full Description

Klicken Sie hier, um die vollständige Beschreibung zur Digital Feedback Map anzuzeigen.

Die „Digital Feedback Map“ ist ein umfassendes interaktives Tool, das zahlreiche digitale Feedback-Methoden vorstellt. Es soll Lehrenden und Lernenden helfen, ihre Lehr- und Lernerfahrungen zu verbessern. In einer Welt, in der sich Technologien ständig weiterentwickeln, bieten digitale Feedback-Methoden Lehrenden und Lernenden gleichermaßen neue Möglichkeiten für effektive Kommunikation und Wachstum. Unsere benutzerfreundliche Plattform, die auf der interaktiven Grundlage von Genial.ly aufbaut, dient Ihnen als ein Portal, um digitale Feedback-Methoden kennenzulernen, zu vergleichen und die für Ihren individuellen Bildungskontext am besten geeignete Methode auszuwählen.

Vollständige Beschreibung

Projekt- Video

Beschreibung der Digital Feedback Map

Robot Feedback

Chatbot Feedback

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

Social Media Feedback

Digital Board Feedback

Chat Feedback

Synchronous/ Asynchronous

Synchronous

Asynchronous

1. General Overview

E-Portfolio Feedback

Video Conference Feedback

Live Poll Feedback (ARS)

Forum Feedback

Wiki Feedback

Cloud Editor Feedback

E-Mail Feedback

Video Feedback

Screencast Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Blog Feedback

Survey Feedback

Audio Feedback

Several Modes

Mainly One Mode

Student to Instructor

Peer Feedback

Instructor to Student

Self Feedback

+Info

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback direction

2.1 Feedback Direction

Robot Feedback

Chatbot Feedback

E-Portfolio Feedback

Self Feedback

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback direction

2.1 Feedback Direction

Audio Feedback

Video Conference Feedback

Video Feedback

Screencast Feedback

E-Mail Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Instructor to Student

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback direction

2.1 Feedback Direction

Social Media Feedback

Cloud Editor Feedback

Wiki Feedback

Blog Feedback

Chat Feedback

Forum Feedback

Peer Feedback

Digital Board Feedback

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback direction

2.1 Feedback Direction

Live Poll Feedback (ARS)

Survey Feedback

Student to Instructor

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback direction

2.1 Feedback Direction

2.2 Feedback Mode

Mainly Three Modes

Mainly Two Modes

Mainly One Mode

+Info

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback mode

Text Editor Feedback

Wiki Feedback

Forum Feedback

Blog Feedback

Email Feedback

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

Audio Feedback

Survey Feedback

Cloud Editor Feedback

Chatbot Feedback

Live Poll Feedback (ARS)

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback mode

2.2 Feedback Mode

TEXT

AUDIO

Mainly One Mode

2.2 Feedback Mode

Screencast Feedback

Video Feedback

VIDEO

AUDIO

Mainly Two Modes

AUDIO

TEXT

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback mode

Robot Feedback

Digital Board Feedback

Social Media Feedback

Chat Feedback

2.2 Feedback Mode

Mainly Three Modes

E-PortfolioFeedback

Video Conference Feedback

VIDEO

AUDIO

TEXT

Classification of digital feedback according to feedback mode

Synchronous

Synchronous/ Asynchronous

Asynchronous

+Info

Classification of digital feedback according to synchronous/ asynchronous

2.3 Feedback Timing

Forum Feedback

2.3 Feedback Timing

2.3 Feedback Timing

E-PortfolioFeedback

Screencast Feedback

E-mail Feedback

Blog Feedback

Video Feedback

Survey Feedback

Audio Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

AsynchronousFeedback Methods

Classification of digital feedback according to synchronous/ asynchronous

Digital Board Feedback

Social Media Feedback

Chat Feedback

Cloud Editor Feedback

2.3 Feedback Timing

Wiki Feedback

Synchronous/ AsynchronousFeedback Methods

Classification of digital feedback according to synchronous/ asynchronous

Video Conference Feedback

Chatbot Feedback

Robot Feedback

Live Poll Feedback (ARS)

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

2.3 Feedback Timing

SynchronousFeedback Methods

Classification of digital feedback according to synchronous/ asynchronous

Local/Global Feedback

Global Feedback

Local Feedback

Classification of digital feedback according to local/ global assessment criteria

+Info

4. Feedback Criteria

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

Live Poll Feedback (ARS)

Wiki Feedback

4. Feedback Criteria

Feedback Methods which are suitable for local errors

Local Feedback

Classification of digital feedback according to local/ global

Digital Board Feedback

E-Portfolio Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Video Conference Feedback

Cloud EditorFeedback

Screencast Feedback

Chat Feedback

Chatbot Feedback

4. Feedback Criteria

Feedback Methods which are suitable for local and global errors

Local/ Global Feedback

Classification of digital feedback according to local/ global

Robot Feedback

Social Media Feedback

Survey Feedback

Blog Feedback

Forum Feedback

E-Mail Feedback

Audio Feedback

Video Feedback

4. Feedback Criteria

Feedback Methods which are suitable for global errors

Global Feedback

Classification of digital feedback according to local/ global

View and download handouts in English and German

Definition

Synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly One

Local Feedback

List ofReferences

Contexts of Use

Advantages

Disadvantages & Combinations

Mostly used platforms:

MI Write

E-rater

Writing Mentor

Grammarly

Feedback Direction:Self Feedback

Navigation:

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

Many of them offer a plagiarism detection feature (e.g. PaperRater, Grammarly).

It can give teachers more time for personalized feedback (Miranty & Widiati, 2021, p. 127)

AWE appears to be more neutral since it is unaffected by “the mood or current state of mind of the teacher” (Barrot, 2021, p. 3)

It can serve as a time and cost relief for large-scale assessments (Zhang, 2021, p. 174)

AWE can contribute to a reduction of teachers’ workload when marking students’ papers (e.g. Palermo & Wilson, 2020, p. 94; Wilson & Czik, 2016, quoted in Ariyanto et al., 2021, p. 43)

For Teachers

Relatively reliable and useful for learners (e.g. Palermo & Wilson, 2020, pp. 95–96), especially regarding mechanics and other lower-level aspects

With plagiarism detectors, students can also monitor their source use (cf. Barrot, 2020, p. 2)

It can give immediate feedback about a wide range of error categories (Barrot, 2021, p. 3)

Feedback is easily accessible, independent of time and place restrictions (Dembsey, 2017, p. 89)

Can be a “confidence builder” (Ariyanto et al., 2021, p. 45) and can lead to increased autonomy and motivation (Bai & Hu, 2017, p. 69; Chen & Cheng, 2008, p. 108; Zhang, 2021, p. 175).

Time saving, as students can apply the system themselves to check their papers instead of having to wait for instructor feedback (Ariyanto et al., 2021, p. 45)

For Students

Advantages

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

Video Conference Feedback

Chat Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Email Feedback

Forum Feedback

Wiki Feedback

Blog Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Screencast Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Students’ queries about unclear AWE feedback can lead to a higher workload (Chen & Cheng, 2008, p. 101)

Lack of praise and positive feedback can lead to demotivation (Cheng, 2017; Dembsey, 2017, p. 89)

AWE software can be expensive (John & Woll, 2020, p. 172) or merely offers some basic functions in the free version, which are of limited use for learners and teachers

Feedback is often provided in English (Jingxin & Razali, 2020, p. 8337); it might be less suitable for lower-proficiency students (Ariyanto et al., 2021, p. 47)

AWE is non-interactive (Gao, 2021) and impersonal (Dembsey, 2017, p. 89; cf. Cotos, 2018, p. 6). Consequently, it may not be as facilitative in terms of uptake and understanding as teacher feedback (Li, 2021, p. 9)

AWE is not very useful for improvements of fluency, text structure (Lv, 2018, p. 194), argumentation and creative expression

Higher-order aspects and “sophisticated syntactic errors” (Wang & Bai, 2021, p. 778) might be specifically challenging for the programs.

AWE feedback can be highly inaccurate (Bai & Hu, 2017, p. 73): not all errors are recognized (Bai & Hu, 2017, p. 68), others are overcorrected (Barrot, 2021, p. 3)

The huge amount of feedback provided by AWE might make students feel overwhelmed (Barrot, 2021, p. 15), discouraged (Cheng, 2017; Cotos, 2018, p. 6) and confused about how to prioritize and proceed with the revision (Cotos, 2018, p. 6)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

Learning Environment

Assignment Types

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Online Class
  • Mainly concerned with written assignments (Cotos, 2018, p. 2)
  • Other file types in which text elements are found, such as in PowerPoint presentations or chat messages
  • Many subjects, but these AWE systems had been originally developed for writers in English-speaking countries (Jingxin & Razali, 2020, p. 8335)
  • Foreign language writing instruction (cf. Jingxin & Razali, 2020, p. 8335), mostly for EFL students, but for the learning of other languages, such as the Spanish Writing Mentor
  • Any learner group and proficiency level (to improve spelling, puntuation, word choice etc.)
  • Self-correction by individual learners or supporting teachers' correction process
  • Mostly used for formative corrective self feedback during the process of written tasks
  • Some AWE platforms, like Grammarly, also provide summative feedback

Learner Groups

Subjects/ Disciplines

Learning Objectives

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE)

Grammarly

Quillbot

Contexts of Use

Google Sites

Weebly

Portfolium

Adobe Portfolio

Sakai

Mahara

E-Portfolio Feedback

Definition

Asynchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Three

Local/ Global Feedback

View and download handouts in English and German

List ofReferences

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Self Feedback

Navigation:

E-portfolios do not only foster self-assessment skills, but also serve as a foundation for follow-up feedback dialogues.

Screencst Feedback

Video Feedback

Audio Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

E-portfolios are easily accessible, and feedback can be exchanged instantaneously (Chionidou et al., 2005, p. 230). The opportunity to incorporate various hyper- and multimedia materials also allows for easy access of external resources (Alawdat, 2013, p. 345)

Teachers can likewise use e-portfolios as a tool for their professional self-reflection (Newby et al., 2007, p. 5)

E-portfolios give the instructor (or assessor) an insight into students’ progress over time (Farrell, 2020, p. 9) while learners can also gain “a more holistic sense of their learning journeys” (Martin, 2013, as cited in Pegrum & Oakley, 2017, p. 22)

By employing e-portfolios, (pre-service) teachers can broaden their repertoire of assessment strategies (Alawdat, 2013, p. 347)

For Teachers

Collaboration with others (e.g. while creating e-portfolios or during peer-review processes) can have social and affective benefits. Insights into each other’s work and peer-feedback process are valuable for confidence-building about their own abilities and for their further development (Lu, 2021a, pp. 170–174)

Encourages self-reflection and self-assessment of students’ accomplishments and areas for improvement (Sharifi et al., 2016, pp. 7-8). This can foster their self-directed learning skills (Kiffer et al., 2021, pp. 4-5) and facilitate their active involvement in the learning process, their critical thinking and self-regulation (Ciesielkiewicz, 2019, p. 650)

Processes of selecting, organizing, and reflecting on their own work help build students’ metacognitive thinking (Ciesielkiewicz, 2019, p. 653; Lu, 2021, p. 169).

Help develop multimodal skills and digital literacies (Pegrum & Oakley, 2017, p. 28) because during their compilation learners may draw on various modalities and media

For Students

Advantages

E-Portfolio feedback

Assessing e-portfolios might be time-consuming for teachers.

Actual learning gain from e-portfolios is still unclear (Alawdat, 2013, p. 341).

Compiling e-portfolios demands appropriate digital literacy and is time consuming (Alawdat, 2013, p. 349). It may lead to learners’ frustration during the creation process, especially if they lack digital skills (Alawdat, 2013, p. 342; Lu, 2021, p. 174).

For Teachers

Students might be concerned about the confidentiality and privacy of their e-portfolios (Pegrum & Oakley, 2017, p. 31; Valdez, 2010, as cited in Alawdat, 2013, p. 349) due to the tool’s dual role for personal reflection and educational assessment.

For Students

Disadvantages

E-portfolio Feedback

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

  • Face-to-face Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Online Class
  • Many disciplines, including vocational education (cf. the review by Lu, 2021a, p. 97)
  • Assist the transition from school or higher education to the job market
  • "Document continuous professional development activities for those already in the workplace" (as reviewed by Farrell, 2020, p. 10)
  • All types of assignemnts
  • Language learners and prospective language teachers
  • Student self feedback
  • External feedback by teachers, employers or peers
  • Show a person’s development over time (Farrell, 2020, p. 9)
  • May be utilized to showcase one’s own competencies (Farrell, 2020, p. 9)
  • Reflective and thus rather personal, can be frequently shared with others for some kind of assessment purpose

E-portfolio Feedback

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Google Sites

Contexts of Use

iMovie (iOS)

Quick Time (iOS)

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages

Disadvantages& Combinations

Techsmith Capture

Camtasia

Opencast

Interactive VideoSuite

Screencastify

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

Loom

Asynchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Two

Local/ Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Instructor to Student

Navigation:

Screencast Feedback

Gain additional language input (Vincelette & Bostic, 2013, p. 267), e.g. pronunciation and listening skills

Convenient, as it is independent of time and space (e.g. McCartan & Short, 2020; Séror, 2012, p. 110;).

Interactive (hyperlinks to websites, quizzes, reflective questions) (Schluer, 2021b, p. 160)

The oral comments convey emotional color, praise and encouragement as well as a depth and subtlety that cannot be transported by written feedback alone (cf. Séror, 2012, p. 111; Silva, 2017, p. 334).

More personalized, makes the learners feel that the teachers have “a genuine interest in their work” and progress (McCartan & Short, 2020, p. 22)

Strengthen the rapport between instructors and learners (Ali, 2016, p. 109; Anson et al., 2016, pp. 392, 397; West & Turner, 2016) without bringing too much affective stress (Séror, 2012, p. 110).

Spoken feedback allows for more information (Ali, 2016, p. 108) and more in-depth explanations (Cavaleri et al., 2013; Özkul & Ortactepe, 2017; Schluer, 2020b, p. 44)

For Teachers

Traceability, increased transparency and clarity of feedback (Ali, 2016, p. 117; Cunningham, 2019; Schluer, 2020c, p. 3)

Multimodal: the commenting process is audible and visible and thus accommodates different learner preferences (Ali, 2016, p. 117; Grigoryan, 2017; Schluer, 2020c, p. 3)

For Students

Advantages

sCREENCAST fEEDBACK

Video Conference Feedback

Cloud Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Students and lecturers might have different feedback preferences (McLaughlin et al., 2007, p. 338); reluctance to try new methods (Mann, 2015, p. 175; Özkul & Ortaçtepe, 2017, p. 874)

It is still unclear whether SCFB is a time saver as compared to other feedback methods (Bakla, 2017, p. 327; Fang, 2019, pp. 118, 147; Ghosn-Chelala & Al-Chibani, 2018, p. 150).

Due to unfamiliarity with the method, both assessors (van der Zijden et al., 2021, p. 60; Vincelette & Bostic, 2013, pp. 270, 273) and learners (Ali, 2016, pp. 109, 118; Bakla, 2017, p. 329) may feel an initial anxiety.

L2 learners may find it hard to follow the contents if the feedback provider talks too fast (Soden, 2016, pp. 224, 230; Stannard, 2007; Zhang, 2018, p. 27).

Technical problems, such as bad audio quality (e.g. Ali, 2016, pp. 110, 116, 118), storage space (Anson, 2015, p. 381; Fang, 2019, pp. 88–89) and long download times of video files (e.g. Ali, 2016; Bakla, 2017, p. 329)

The “multiple modalities may overwhelm” some students (Fang, 2019, p. 36; cf. Henderson & Phillips, 2015, p. 63) because they require them to listen, think and write at the same time (Ali, 2016, pp. 108, 115; Elola & Oskoz, 2016, p. 69).

As a one-way interaction (e.g. Mahoney et al., 2019, p. 166; Stannard, 2019, pp. 67–68; Thompson & Lee, 2012), students are unable to immediately reply to it and ask questions (cf. Bakla, 2017, p. 328; Mann, 2015, p. 171; Özkul & Ortaçtepe, 2017, p. 873).

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

Screencast fEEDBACK

Camtasia: combination screencast + talking head

Camtasia

Application name

Watch video tutorials on YouTube

View/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

  • Mainly used by higher education staff to provide feedback to students
  • peer-to-peer SCFB (Schluer, 2021a) or learner-to-instructor SCFB (McDowell, 2020a; 2020b; 2020c)
  • Anything that can be displayed on a screen, such as electronic texts, presentations, simulations or websites (e.g. Borup et al., 2015, p. 179; Delaney, 2013, p. 299; Perkoski, 2017, pp. 45, 47, 51–52)
  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class

Learner Groups

  • Most commonly in language learning contexts, notably for improving students’ writing skills
  • Teacher education and teacher training (e.g. Borup et al., 2015; Schluer, 2020b; 2021a; 2021d)
  • Many further disciplines, including social and natural sciences, medicine and nursing, mathematics and engineering
  • Primarily beneficial for formative assessment, i.e. in-process support
  • Summative assessments can also be done via SCFB if institutional regulations allow it (e.g. McCarthy, 2015; 2020).

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Screencast fEEDBACK

Contexts of Use

Audio comments in MS Word, GoogleDoc or Evernote Voice memo apps (recording) Audacity, YOCLE or Vocaroo (recording and distribution)

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages& Combinations

Asynchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly One

Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Instructor to Student

Navigation:

View and download handouts in English and German

List ofReferences

Audio Feedback

A direct integration is possible by inserting voice comments into a document that also contains written feedback.

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Signals teacher’s interest and commitment (Rotheram, 2007)

Very well suited for auditory learners; benefits dyslexic learners and learners with visual impairments (Bond, 2009)

The audio files can be listened to repeatedly and accessed on the go as well as at home (Cann, 2014)

Clearer, more detailed, more personal, more understandable, and allows less room for ambiguity (Bond, 2009; Merry & Orsmond, 2008)

Audio feedback is often more elaborate than traditional written feedback (Bond, 2009, Merry & Orsmond, 2008), and spoken explanations result in less misinterpretation (Sipple, 2007)

Timesaving: one minute of audio recording is equivalent to six minutes of written feedback (Lunt & Curran, 2010)

Less writing or typing can alleviate physical problems such as RSI syndrome (overuse syndrome) (Bond, 2009)

More personal, providing more constructive feedback for improvement than simply evaluating the task (Hennessy & Forrester, 2014); enables and encourages detailed feedback (Pölert, 2020)

For Teachers

Learners’ confidence can be fostered because audio feedback often leaves a more positive overall impression (Cavanaugh & Song, 2014, p. 126)

Vocal emphasis can clarify the meaning of certain comments, and the pace of speech can be varied to draw the learner's attention to complicated concepts (Bond, 2009, p. 2)

For Students

Advantages

AUDIO fEEDBACK

Email Feedback

Chat Feedback

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

To enhance this, it is suggested to combine audio feedback with follow-up exchanges

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

To solve this, the teacher (or even the students) might use speech-to-text software to obtain the transcripts (cf. Bond, 2009, p. 2; Rotheram, 2009, p. 23)

In this combination, written feedback can be handed out separately, e.g. in the form of a completed assessment rubric or any other written summary. The brief written remarks (for instance as bullet points) can then serve as a guideline for (producing and) processing the more detailed audio comments (Heimbürger, 2018, p. 114).

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Audio files may be too large to send via e-mail, and, thus, an online server is required (Hennessey & Forrester, 2014)

Learners cannot skim the feedback and search for keywords; they must listen to the whole audio file (Cann, 2014)

Initially, the recording and sharing of individual audio files is more (time) consuming than written feedback (Merry & Orsmond, 2008)

The effectiveness of audio feedback is not higher than that of written feedback (Macgregor et al., 2011)

Feedback is separated from the work being assessed; no direct reference (unlike, for instance, written comments in the margin) (Bond, 2009)

Often less emphasis on grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors (Cavanaugh & Song, 2014)

Editing of audio files requires specific software and technical expertise (Bond, 2009, p. 3; Cann, 2014)

For Teachers

Not suitable for visual learners (Olesova et al., 2011)

For Students

Disadvantages

Audio fEEDBACK

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Mostly been employed by teachers to give feedback to learners
  • Mostly been implemented in higher education settings (mainly undergraduate)
  • Mainly used to provide feedback for written tasks, such as essays (Cann, 2014) and seminar papers (Carruthers et al., 2014)
  • Group presentations
  • Pronunciation teaching (Yoon & Lee, 2009)
  • Suitable for summative and formative purposes (Hennessy & Forrester, 2014, p. 778; Rotheram, 2009, p. 22)
  • Either for the work of individuals or groups (Heimbürger, 2018, p. 107)

Subjects/ Disciplines

Many disciplines, such as

  • sociology (Bond, 2009)
  • biology (Merry & Orsmond, 2008)
  • nursing (Gould & Day, 2013)
  • business (Chew, 2014),
  • programming (Renzella & Cain, 2020)
  • engineering (Heimbürger, 2018)
  • English (EFL and ESL) (Olesova et al., 2011) and other language courses

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Assignment Types

Audio fEEDBACK

iPhone voice memos

Contexts of Use

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages& Combinations

Asynchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly One

Global Feedback

Feedback Direction:Instructor to Student

Navigation:

View and download handouts in English and German

E-mail Feedback

List ofReferences

Video Feedback

Audio Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Easy to attach hyperlinks and further documents

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Combination with AWE: the mail text might be checked by using an AWE tool

AWE

Combination with text editor: Specific comments could be directly inserted into the attached file, while the mail text will offer general corrective feedback or advice (suggested by Honeycutt, 2001, p. 53 )

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

E-mail can create a sense of anonymity, which caters for the preferences of shy learners in particular. It may thus encourage greater interaction (e.g., follow-up questions, need for clarification) (Huett, 2004, p. 38).

Seen as a more casual form of communication (compared with, for instance, on-site office hours) and could thus encourage more questions and comments from learners regarding their individual feedback and progress (Huett, 2004, p. 38, Barton & Wolery, 2007, p. 56)

General feedback can be sent simultaneously to all course participants, which saves time and effort (Nnadozie et al., 2020, p. 7)

Transmitting large amounts of information quickly and easily to learners (Nnadozie et al., 2020, p. 7)

Learners tend to respond very positively to the use of digital tools and often prefer them over traditional methods; they are familiar with e-mailing from their personal lives (digital literacy) (De Coursey & Dandashly, 2015, pp. 216-217)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Teachers can use their e-mail record to see the progress and development of individual learners over time (Barton & Wolery, 2007, p. 56)

E-mails provide an electronic record of the feedback. Learners can thus review it at any time (Barton & Wolery, 2007, p. 56)

Timesaving: it does not require scheduling with learners (in contrast to on-site feedback) (Barton & Wolery, 2007, p. 56)

Feedback mails can include questions or response options for learners to encourage a dialogue between them and the teacher (Barton & Wolery, 2007, p. 56)

No pressure to respond immediately to the criticism and feedback received (Bond, 2009)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

Email fEEDBACK

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Video Feedback

Audio Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Multitude of e-mails (especially from several courses) is unmanageable. Teachers can quickly lose track of e-mails, and the incoming mails from learners could be overwhelming (De Coursey & Dandashly, 2015, p. 222)

Teachers cannot directly address and comment on the errors but can only refer to specific errors in their e-mail, which can lead to ambiguities (De Coursey & Dandashly, 2015, pp. 223-224)

E-mail communication is a primarily text-based medium and thus disadvantageous for auditory learner types (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

The lack of social cues in e-mails has been shown to hinder relationship-building with learners, contrary to, for instance, on-site meetings (Kurtzberg et al., 2006, p. 6)

For Teachers

E-mails lack social cues (facial expressions, gestures, certain tone of voice and other non-verbal communication). However, people rely on these cues to decide how to respond or what to do next. This could lead to a "negativity bias" towards e-mails (Glei, 2016; Huett, 2004, p. 39).

For Students

Disadvantages

Email fEEDBACK

  • General feedback to a course or group (e.g. Keefer, 2020; White, 2021)
  • Personal feedback provided to individual students (Barton & Wolery, 2007; McLeod et al., 2019; Zhu, 2012)
  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Summative comments written at the end of an assignment
  • Formative purposes, including progress feedback, e.g. in blended learning (see van Oldenbeek et al., 2019) or distance learning settings (cf. Huett, 2004, p. 35)
  • Often for teacher-to-student feedback and peer feedback among students and colleagues
  • Also for student-to-instructor feedback (e.g. Bloch, 2002)

Many disciplines, such as

  • psychology (Keefer, 2020),
  • EFL (Farshi, 2015; Hosseini, 2012; 2013)
  • audit (White, 2021),
  • engineering (Hassini, 2006)
  • business (Hassini, 2006; Nnadozie et al., 2020),
  • computer science (Voghoei et al., 2020),
  • teacher training (McLeod et al., 2019)
  • education (Yu & Yu, 2002)

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Assignment Types

Email fEEDBACK

Gmail

Contexts of Use

iMovie (iOS)

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages

Disadvantages& Combinations

Photo Booth(iOS)

Camtasia

Screencast-O-Matic

Loom

Asynchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Two

Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Instructor to Student

Navigation:

(Talking-head) Video Feedback

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

Less time-consuming than detailed handwritten/ typed feedback (Borup et al., 2015)

Allows for elaborate, clear, and detailed feedback (Borup et al., 2015, pp. 176–177; Hall et al., 2016)

Filming oneself raises awareness of one's own actions and thus enables teachers to reflect upon and improve their own feedback practices (Tochen, 2008, p. 426)

Feedback can be paused and viewed repeatedly (Tseng & Yeh, 2019, p. 146)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Addresses multiple learner preferences (visual and auditory learner types)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Learners perceive video feedback very positively (Hall et al., 2016, p. 9), thus helps promoting learner engagement and motivation (Hall et al., 2016, p. 1)

Fewer misinterpretations due to the perception of social cues, such as body language, facial expressions or gestures (Borup, 2021), as well as conversational cues, e.g. tone and pace of voice (Ryan, 2021, p. 138);

Increases the teacher’s social presence. It allows them to have a “conversation”, speak with emotions and develop a sense of closeness with the learners (Borup et al., 2014; Ryan, 2021, p. 138)

Creates the impression of face-to-face feedback, which is one of the most favored feedback methods, as it allows learners to perceive social cues (Borup et al., 2014, p. 243, Hall et al., 2016, p. 13)

Can facilitate high-quality formative feedback (Hall et al., 2016, p. 1)

Is personalized for the learner (Borup, 2021), so learners perceive the teacher as more authentic and honest (Borup et al., 2014, p. 242; Hall et al., 2016, pp. 17-18)

Allows for natural, open and casual communication with learners (Borup et al., 2014, p. 240)

Videos can help learners build a sense of connection or relationship with the teacher (Borup et al., 2012, p. 201; Borup et al., 2014, p. 236)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

(talking-head) Video fEEDBACK

When being used together with screencast feedback, depending on the size of the displayed talking-head video, its effects might diminish

Screencast Feedback

To solve this, written feedback could be provided additionally, e.g. by means of a completed assessment sheet or by typing comments into the submitted assignment (Bahula & Kay, 2020, p. 6539)

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Integrated webcam videos may obscure parts of the image or presentation (Borup, 2021)

Complex editing and time-consuming creation of videos (Borup et al., 2014, p. 236; Lee & Bailey, 2016, p. 138)

Requires a certain level of technical expertise (Borup et al., 2014, p. 236; Lee & Bailey, 2016, p. 138)

The teacher must be in a quiet room with minimal external auditory and visual distractions (Borup et al., 2014, p. 236)

Potential frustration over student’s poor performance cannot be hidden in the video due to recorded body language and facial expressions (Borup, 2021)

Outdated or slow devices or unstable internet connections result in long loading times for videos (Lee & Bailey, 2016, p. 146)

Learners who perceive on-site oral feedback situations as negative and uncomfortable might feel similar about video feedback (Hall et al., 2016, p. 20)

Very difficult to locate specific aspects of the feedback in their own work (due to separation of work and feedback) or to refer to specific passages when asking questions about it (Hall et al., 2016; Henderson & Phillips, 2015)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

(talking-head) VIDEO fEEDBACK

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

  • Specifically suited for “feedback that doesn’t require you to show student work” (Borup, 2021, n.p.)
  • Less appropriate for written assignments
  • Mostly used for summative feedback
  • Depending on the assignment, can also be used for formative purposes, such as progress report
  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Commonly from instructors to students (e.g. Henderson & Phillips, 2015; Parton, Crain-Dorough, & Hancock, 2010)
  • also for peer feedback (Huang, 2016)

Many disciplines, such as

  • education
  • business
  • the humanities and the natural sciences (cf. the review by Bahula & Kay, 2020, p. 6536; Crook et al., 2012)

Learner Groups

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

(talking-head) VIDEO fEEDBACK

Camtasia

Contexts of Use

and comment features

Pages (iOS)

MS Office Word: “Track changes”

Open Office Writer

Asynchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly One

Local/ Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Instructor to Student

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages& Combinations

Text Editor Feedback

View and download handouts in English and German

List ofReferences

Automated Writing Evaluation

Suggested Combination:

One of the most accessible and easiest methods for digital feedback (Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 3)

Teachers may insert preset text-based comments or links to helpful websites (Chang et al., 2018, p. 409)

Timesaving for teachers, as papers are usually submitted as Word documents and can thus be edited immediately using the same program (Chang et al., 2018, p. 409)

The actual editing and adding of comments is intuitive and quick (Rodina, 2008, p. 109)

Low time investment, as correction and commenting can be done simultaneously

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Requires no special technical expertise compared to e.g. screencast feedback or audio feedback

Can lead to improved writing skills in areas such as grammar, spelling, sentence structure, or vocabulary (Chang et al., 2018, p. 409; Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 2)

Students perceive text editor feedback as positive, straightforward, and convenient (Chang et al., 2018, p. 408)

"Track changes" feature (MS Word) preserves the original learner-product in addition to the suggested corrections, allowing learners to make a cognitive comparisons and identify differences between their original and the suggested forms (Chang et al., 2018, p. 409)

Timesaving: suggestions for changes can be taken over directly (Silva, 2012, p. 11)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Learners can access feedback from anywhere (e.g. from home, the university, the library, etc.)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Feedback is more detailed and longer (Rodina, 2008, p. 106)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Ideal for anonymous peer feedback (this can lead to more direct, honest, and critical feedback) (Chang et al., 2018, p. 409)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

Text Editor fEEDBACK

Screencast Feedback

Video Feedback

Audio Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Rather impersonal; does not strengthen the relationship between teachers and learners (Silva, 2012, p. 9)

Focus is often on the textual surface (such as spelling, punctuation, grammar, formatting), thus neglecting the content, structure, and organization of the text (Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 3)

Detailed and long comments can lead to space problems and make the edited document cluttered (Silva, 2012, p. 3)

Lack of flexibility of the text editor software, as not all settings can be adjusted. For example, the default settings are often very red-heavy, which can be discouraging for learners (Chang et al., 2018, p. 409)

High time consumption to read the whole document (Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 3)

Potential incomprehensibility and miscommunication if there are only written comments (Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 3)

Not particularly motivating and does not promote learner-teacher interaction (Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 3)

High amount of comments can be overwhelming; not possible to structure the comments or set a focus

When used for peer feedback, learner proficiency can influence the effectiveness of the feedback. Low proficiency learners often benefit more from peer feedback than high proficiency learners (Chang et al., 2018, p. 409; Ge, 2011, p. 88)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

Text editor fEEDBACK

  • A common practice in numerous disciplines (see e.g. Clark-Gordon et al., 2019)
  • Hybrid Class
  • Online Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Most frequently employed for feedback on written assignments, especially in large classes (Clark-Gordon et al., 2019)
  • Formative corrective feedback as track changes and comment bubble
  • Summative feedback
  • Teacher-to-student feedback (e.g.Rodina, 2008)
  • Peer feedback purposes (e.g. AbuSeileek, 2013b; Ho & Savignon, 2013)
  • Combination (Al-Olimat & AbuSeileek, 2015, p. 27), i.e. starting with peer feedback and complementing it with instructor feedback

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Assignment Types

Text editor fEEDBACK

Microsoft Word

Contexts of Use

Google Meet

Microsoft Teams

Skype

BigBlueButton

Zoom

Synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Three

Local/ Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Instructor to Student

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages

Video Conference Feedback

View and download handouts in English and German

List ofReferences

E-Portfolio Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Cloud Editor Feedback

Live Poll Feedback

Chat Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Cloud Editor Feedback

Screencast Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Contributes to a significantly higher cognitive, social and teaching presence (Seckman, 2018, pp. 20-21)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Students and teachers can enhance communication by using text charts, note-taking, screen-sharing, file-sharing etc. (Monteiro, 2014, p. 58)

Enables immediate feedback and supports collaborative learning among students (Fatani, 2020, p. 29)

Interactive online communication includes verbal and visual cues, e.g. body language (Monteiro, 2014; Rassaei, 2017, p. 2)

May improve students’ listening skills (Martin, 2005, p. 402), especially in foreign language learning settings

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Conference can be recorded and downloaded for later review (Rottermond & Gabrion, 2021, p. 41)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

May increase students’ motivation and engagement in the learning progress (Ahmed et al., 2021, p. 307)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Utilizing the screen-sharing function is useful for discussing work in progress (Schluer, 2020, pp. 53-54)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Saves time and travel costs (Martin, 2005, p. 400), allows for interaction among students and teachers in different places around the world (Martin, 2005, p. 397), and can thus enhance communication and collaboration skills (Martin, 2005, pp. 298, 402)

Students “can ask questions and/ or work through revisions on the spot” (Rottermond & Gabrion, 2021, p. 41), discuss reasons behind certain mistakes and corrections (Ahmed et al., 2021, p. 305)

Students and teachers can see each other during the feedback process (Rassaei, 2017, p. 2), but due to modal differences, it is not as intrusive for the learners as face-to-face interaction (Rassaei, 2017, p. 1)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

Video conference fEEDBACK

Students are possibly overwhelmed, confused, or frustrated by the multimodal functionalities of conferencing tools (Seckmann, 2018, p. 21), which can constitute a cognitive challenge for them (Guichon, 2012, p. 189)

During one-on-one conferences with students, the rest of the course needs to work on their own without teacher guidance (Chiappetta, 2020; Schluer, 2020, pp. 53-54)

Agreement on meeting times outside of normal online sessions might be difficult (Ahmed et al., 2021, p. 293); the scheduling process can be time-consuming (Chiappetta, 2020)

Possible difficulties with handling the software or lack of hardware (e.g. microphone or web camera) (Samuels, 2006, p. 92)

Verbal, paraverbal and nonverbal information is often restricted in video communication due to technological limitations as compared to in-person exchanges (Rassaei, 2017, p. 2), e.g. regarding eye gaze and physical distance

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

Video conference fEEDBACK

  • Individual feedback conferences for formative or summative feedback, but related research is almost non-existent (e.g. Chiappetta, 2020; Samuels, 2006)
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Online Class
  • Almost all subjects and disciplines
  • Instructor-to-student feedback
  • Peer feedback as part of e-tandem exchanges (e.g. Arellano-Soto & Parks, 2021; O’Dowd, 2007)

Assignment Types

  • Mostlyutilized as a teaching tool (e.g. Ghazal, Samsudin, & Aldowah, 2015)
  • Oral corrective feedback strategies as part of online teaching sessions (Monteiro, 2014; Rassaei, 2017)

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Big Blue Button

Video conference fEEDBACK

Contexts of Use

In-built Blog Tool of LMS

WordPress

Blogger

Asynchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Two

Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Peer Feedback

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages& Combinations

Blog Feedback

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

Text Editor FB

Video Feedback

The comment function is often restricted to text. However, via hyperlinks, additional resources can be integrated that may direct the blogger to external websites or video platforms or to a shared cloud space.

Audio Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Can be used for individual or group feedback (Çiftçi, 2009, p. 43)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Easy and quick creation (Sayed, 2010, p. 55)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

It motivates both students and the instructor to interact beyond the classroom (Greer & Reed, 2008, as cited in Pham & Usaha, 2016, p. 727)

The feedback comments can be viewed in chronological order (Çiftçi, 2009, p. 43), which helps teachers to monitor the contributions by individual students

Blogs “are made available to both instructional practitioners and students involved, free of any financial costs” (Zhang et al., 2014, p. 679)

Gives rather shy and quiet learners more time for the formulation of responses and consideration of what to write (Kitchakarn, 2013, p. 155; Sayed, 2010, p. 55)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Allows students to read their peers’ assignments at their own pace, time and place, making them feel less rushed or under time pressure (Gedera, 2012, p. 27; Sayed, 2010, p. 55)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Writing to an authentic audience can foster leaners’ writing motivation, interaction, and self-confidence (Çiftçi, 2009, p. 45; Gedera, 2012, p. 28; Huang, 2016, p. 44)

Useful tool to improve students’ writing skills (Hernandez et al., 2017, p. 115), attitude towards writing, confidence in writing (Hernandez et al., 2017, p. 138), critical thinking skills (Çiftçi, 2009, p. 45; Huang, 2016, p. 44), cooperative and autonomous learning (Zhang et al., 2014, p. 679)

Can cultivate learning communities “that build professionalism and engage students in higher levels of self-reflection” (Novakovich, 2016, p. 17)

Blogs create a discourse community (Çiftçi, 2009, p. 45; Çiftçi & Kocoglu, 2012, p. 73), promote learner interaction and nurture a sense of class community (Micelia, Murraya & Kennedya, 2010, cited in Pham & Usaha, 2016, p. 727)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

blog fEEDBACK

To facilitate collaboration, blogging could be preceded by collaborative writing in a wiki (Dippold, 2009, p. 32) or in a cloud document.

Cloud Editor FB

Wiki Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Text Editor FB

Suggested Combination:

The reviewers may print a PDF of the blog in order to annotate it with specific comments

Increased workload as teachers may have to “maintain constant attention to how well the students have been progressing […] in terms of the essay completed, peer feedback, and revision” (Zhang et al., 2014, p. 680)

Direct editing of blog entries is not possible (Dippold, 2009, p. 32)

Highlighting language errors on blogs takes more time than marking errors on paper (Huang, 2016, p. 44)

Due to blogs’ asynchronous nature, comments cannot be immediately followed up

It is “difficult to signpost errors in order to enable students to improve on their performance” (Dippold, 2009, p. 28). Thus, blogs might rather be implemented for very general feedback than for specific corrective feedback (Huang, 2016, p. 44)

During peer-review, students are inclined to use informal language and social comments instead of engaging in meaningful, constructive feedback activities (Wu, 2006, p. 133; Xie, Ke & Sharma, 2008, p. 23)

Some students do not feel competent enough to read and comment on their peer’s blogs (Çiftçi, 2009, p. 109)

Blog usage may cause challenges regarding practicality and data security (Pham & Usaha, 2016, p. 727)

Blog usage lacks structure (Sayed, 2010, p. 58) and the’ online environment can be more distracting and less formal for learners (Hernandez et al., 2017, p. 106)

Some blogs require registration before users can comment on blog posts; remembering various log-in data can be troublesome (Zhang et al., 2017, p. 680)

Due to the public nature of online blogs, students might not dare to openly express their opinions or to write about certain topics (Novakovich, 2016, p. 26; Sayed, 2010, p. 58). Especially for peer-review, students might be more conservative in their writing. This is not conducive to students' self-reflection (Xie, Ke & Sharma, 2008, p. 23)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

blog fEEDBACK

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Mainly used for peer feedback (e.g. Dippold, 2009, pp. 18–19) because of its public commenting function
  • Teacher feedback (Çiftçi, 2009, p. 43; see also Huang, 2016, p. 38)
  • Summative comments for the blog entries post as blog comments
  • Can also serve for formative purposes
  • Mostly used for written assignments, however, its ability to contain hyper- and multimedia materials (cf. Hernandez et al., 2017, p. 104) makes it also applicable to multimodal assignements
  • Many subjects, notably in ESL (English as a second language) or EFL (English as a foreign language) set- tings (e.g. Çiftçi & Kocoglu, 2012; Nguyen, 2012)
  • Not only useful for educational settings, but also for social in- teractions in personal or commercial contexts (cf. Campbell, 2003, cited by Gedera, 2012, p. 19)

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

bLOG fEEDBACK

Blogger

Contexts of Use

WeChat

Twitter

Instagram

WhatsApp

Facebook

Telegram

Skype

A-/synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Two

Local/ Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Peer Feedback

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages& Combinations

Chat Feedback

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

AWE

Cloud Editor FB

Text Editor FB

Suggested Combination:

Instructors may comment on a document with the reviewing features of their text editor and then schedule a chat appointment with the student (Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 4)

Chats make incorrect forms or suggestions (visually) more salient as compared to oral interactions (Arroyo & Yilmaz, 2018, p. 944); thus focus-on-form activities are facilitated (Lai & Zhao, 2006, p. 104) and learners’ awareness of the mistakes is raised (Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 7)

If used in combination with a videoconference, teachers can provide corrections and suggestions in the text chat without interrupting the flow of communication (Avval et al., 2021, p. 212)

Through chats, the social presence of teachers and peers can be enhanced (Sotillo, 2010, p. 364; Udeshinee, 2021, p. 184) and they are typically perceived as interactive and conversational (Honeycutt, 2001, pp. 48, 50)

Might foster learners’ critical thinking (Avval et al., 2021, p. 212)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Students are familiar with chats from their free-time and feel comfortable using them (Udeshinee, 2021, pp. 184–187)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Chats enable instantaneous corrections (Arroyo & Yilmaz, 2018, p. 967), which is valuable for learners’ in-process support

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Multimodal and conversational, e.g. messages can contain multimedia attachments such as audio or video feedback, pictures, emojis (or emoticons) and hyperlinks (Bower & Kawaguchi, 2011, p. 43; Dao et al., 2021, p. 2; Soria et al., 2020, p. 797)

Chats appear more anonymous and less face-threatening than live interactions, which may encourage more participation (AbuSeileek & Rabab’ah, 2013, pp. 49, 55; Satar & Özdener, 2008, p. 606). Moreover, learners might be less afraid about pointing out mistakes and addressing problems (Chang, 2009, p. 57)

Students can contribute and reconsult any time and everywhere in the chat, they do not have to wait for teacher’s permission to speak (Chang, 2009, p. 57; Liu & Sadler, 2015, p. 146);

Slightly delayed nature of chats affords students more time for planning and formulating their messages, reflecting on them and understanding them (Chang, 2009, p. 57; Dao et al., 2021, p. 20; Razagifard & Razzaghifard, 2011, p. 13), thus particularly suitable for lower-proficiency students (Satar & Özdener, 2008, p. 606)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

Chat fEEDBACK

During video conferences, corrections or feedforward advice could be typed into the chat window while learners talk to each other or present an assignment (cf. Guichon et al., 2012).

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Lack of social cues, e.g. facial expressions, gestures, emotions (Dao et al., 2021, p. 16)

Prerequisite of stable internet availability and necessary hardware (Udeshinee, 2021, p. 185)

Overlap of several interlocutors in a synchronous chat can lead to confusion (Loewen & Erlam, 2006, p. 10)

Centers more on local aspects rather than higher-order concerns (Chang, 2009, p. 58), probably because longer explanations would be too time-consuming

References to specific passages of an assignment as well as cross-references to earlier chat sequences are problematic (Honeycutt, 2001, pp. 28-29)

Compared to other methods, chat feedback may restrict the level of detail and the resultant clarity of the messages (Chang, 2009, p. 56; Ene & Upton, 2018, p. 8). It usually contains a significantly lower amount of feedback (Ene & Upton, 2018, pp. 7, 10)

Scheduling of specific chat meetings could be problematic (Chang, 2009, p. 57)

Teachers may fear infringements of data protection rights if they share their personal phone number for educational purposes

Interlocutors could feel pressured to engage in rapid turn-taking, while waiting for responses might be annoying as well (Dao et al., 2021, pp. 19, 21; Chang, 2009, p. 59)

Due to personal or cultural reasons, teachers, students, or their parents could be against chatting if it is considered unethical or informal (Udeshinee, 2021, p. 185)

Chat mode might incline learners to engage in more off-task interactions (Chang, 2009, p. 58), e.g. social interaction rather than providing feedback and corrections (Bower & Kawaguchi, 2011, p. 59), thus teachers could have difficulties “in keeping the students on task” (Lai & Zhao, 2006, p. 10)

Typing is usually slower than speaking, which may negatively affect the flow of the exchange (Chang, 2009, pp. 57–59; Dao et al., 2021, pp. 18–21). Especially teachers and learners with “[l]imited typing skills” might feel discouraged and frustrated (Lai & Zhao, 2006, p. 115)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

chat fEEDBACK

Telegram

Fake messenger

WhatsApp

Application name

Watch video tutorials on YouTube

View/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class

Learner Groups

  • Suitable for feedback in multiple directions, such as peer feedback (Chang, 2009; Dao et al., 2021), instructor feedback (Avval et al., 2021) and formative student feedback to the teacher (Chen, 2021).
  • Often for corrections and quick feedback
  • Corrective feedback during e-tandem exchanges between foreign language learners (Akbar, 2017; Bower & Kawaguchi, 2011; Liu, 2015)
  • Formative feedback in video conferences (e.g. language, content- or technology-related comments)

Learning Objectives

  • Mostly implementd in language learning contexts, though could also be useful in other disciplines
  • E-tandem exchanges (Akbar, 2017; Bower & Kawaguchi, 2011; Liu, 2015)
  • In class excersises, such as specific grammar exercises in language courses (Samani & Noordin, 2013)

Subjects/ Disciplines

Learning Environment

Assignment Types

CHAT fEEDBACK

Contexts of Use

Wiki Function of Institutional LMS

Google Sites

Wikipedia

A-/synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Three

Local Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Peer Feedback

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages& Combinations

Wiki Feedback

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

Video Feedback

Audio Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

By using wikis, teachers can foster their students’ development of a broad skill set, i.e. idea creation; writing in the target language; information literacy; social, interpersonal, personal, cognitive, and metacognitive skills; and positive affect (Kemp et al., 2019, p. 159)

Within a wiki, instructors can respond to their learners’ questions, which is especially helpful in larger classes where students might be hesitant to ask questions (Kemp et al., 2019, p. 151)

May decrease a teacher’s workload (Kemp et al., 2019, p. 159)

Teachers may set up their own wiki that includes links to their students’ wikis. This way, they can quickly access their students' work to provide formative feedback and encouragement during the writing process, as well as summative feedback and feedforward advice after their students have finished their writing (Kemp et al., 2019, p. 151)

Using wikis’ “history” function, teachers can monitor the students’ contributions and the peer feedback at any time (Kemp et al., 2019, p. 152)

Free from the limit of time and space (Kemp et al., 2019, p. 151), wikis enable students to work with their peers outside of the classroom (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 218), increasing and maintaining interaction and connection with their peers (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 219). In this process, students can learn from other people’s errors (Kemp et al., 2019, p. 158) as well as from their strengths (Lin & Yang, 2011, p. 94)

Multifunctionality and flexibility: students can edit the content, share class documents, fix errors, create their own pages, upload pictures and other class-related files (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 220)

Usually free of charge (Vahedipour & Rezvani, 2017, p. 120)

Provision of peer feedback via wikis can improve students’ critical thinking skills (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 218), communication skills (Kemp et al., 2019, p. 157), and problem-solving skills (Lin & Yang, 2011, p. 91), thus fosters student’s articulation and reflection upon “their own learning and understanding; eventually improving their project” (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 221)

It promotes the development of a supportive student community by offering an environment of “feedback, reflection, and creativity” (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 212)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

wiki fEEDBACK

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

“The mitigation of teacher authority caused by peer feedback and Wiki writing seems to deconstruct the traditional student-teacher power relationship” (Lin & Yang, 2011, p. 96). However, it should be seen positively.

Wiki feedback is mostly used for peer feedback, which cannot fully replace instructor feedback. Moreover, students often find instructor feedback more helpful (Kemp et al., 2019)

Not anonymous, so students may worry about giving negative feedback (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 219). In specific cultural environments, students might be afraid of providing and receiving negative feedback (Peled, Bar-Shalom & Sharon, 2014, p. 580) and to “lose face” in front of their peers (Lin & Yang, 2011, p. 97)

Many students have not used the Wiki before and will need to be trained first, which can be time-consuming (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 220); some students may be resistant to using new technology (Lin & Yang, 2011, p. 97)

Using wikis might be challenging for some students, e.g. due to functional challenges, unfamiliarity with the wiki editing interface, absence of auto-saving feature, uploading difficulties, or formatting issues (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 219), thus leading to lots of time for editing and formatting (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 219)

The students’ learning gain depends on the quality of the peer feedback, as it does not come from an expert (Gielen & Wever, 2012, p. 592); peer feedback comments might be vague and less helpful (Demirbilek, 2015, p. 219)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

wiki fEEDBACK

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Formative intra-group peer feedback during collaborative working and learning
  • Summative inter-group peer feedback and instructor feedback at the end of the group project
  • Intended for assignments that are accessible by a larger audience, e.g. the classroom, school or general public (cf. the review by Lin & Yang, 2011, pp. 89–90, 95)
  • Group co-constructing work assignments during collaborative learning
  • Intra-group peer feedback: given by peers working in the same group
  • Inter-group peer feedback: given by members of different groups in the same learning community
  • Instructor feedback

Including but not limited to:

  • EFL (Lin & Yang, 2011)
  • Education (Demirbilek, 2015; Gielen & De Wever, 2012)
  • Psychology
  • Medicine
  • Geography
  • Engineering
  • Information science
  • Public administration (Hu & Johnston, 2012)

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

wIKI fEEDBACK

Wikipedia

Contexts of Use

Knowledge Forum

Blackboard - Forum

Moodle - Forum

A-/synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Two

Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Peer Feedback

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages& Combinations

Forum Feedback

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Video Feedback

Audio Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

It can be easily combined with other feedback methods, especially if the forum is part of a LMS and/ or allows for multimedia attachments.

Forum feedback offers a systematic structure for student support, facilitates sustained interaction between teacher and students as well as the monitoring of participants’ contributions, i.e. the comments they post and their responses to the feedback (Ludwig-Hardman & Dunclap, 2003, cited in Rochera, Engel & Coll, 2021, p. 4)

Teachers can have more interaction with their students (Pedrosa-de-Jesus & Moreira, 2012, p. 73), especially in long-distance learning .

Compared with offline classes, the online environment encourages students (incl. shy students) to ask more questions or start a discussion (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 82)

Forum feedback facilitates a sense of a learning community, promoting communication and exchange between students and teachers. It promotes a collaborative learning environment, encourages self-identification as well as listening to other points of view (Ekahitanond, 2013, p. 260), which makes the learning context social and interactive (Pedrosa-de-Jesus & Moreira, 2012, p. 57)

The asynchronous nature gives students more time to reflect and search for further information before making a contribution (De Wever et al., 2006, cited in Pedrosa-de-Jesus & Moreira, 2012, p. 57). They can thus mindfully construct and phrase their ideas (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 86)

According to Ekahitanond (2013, p. 260), the process of peer feedback in ODFs can thus encourage students to engage in critical thinking and assists students in reflecting on, rethinking, and revising the content of their work.

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

Forum fEEDBACK

Video Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Less personal than face-to-face interactions (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 83)

Teachers may have difficulties in assessing the quality of student posts (Pedrosa-de-Jesus & Moreira, 2012, p. 72)

“Communication in web-based environments requires clarity and careful construction of the message” (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 86), as it is easy to misunderstand or to be perceived incorrectly in an asynchronous online mode

The cloud space might be insufficient if the application is used extensively (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 3)

High number of remarks can confuse or overburden the feedback recipients, especially with multiple peer-reviewers

During a synchronous feedback process, students might hesitate to continue their assignment and wait for further feedback (Fuccio, 2014, p. 223)

Feedback is usually not immediate (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 84) and questions might be left unanswered (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 83)

Depth of interaction between students and instructors is not comparable to face-to-face settings (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 83)

Lack of visual communication cues (Hara, Bonk & Angeli, 2000, p. 116; Vonderwell, 2003, p. 79)

Feedback can be difficult to structure and moderate (Pedrosa-de-Jesus & Moreira, 2012, p. 57)

Students may feel uncomfortable about interacting with other students who they do not know (e.g. students from other schools or fellow students in remote learning) (Vonderwell, 2003, p. 82)

It is not always possible to provide appropriate feedback, especially with many forum posts being entered in a short period of time, which is usually the case shortly before a deadline is approaching (Pedrosa-de-Jesus & Moreira, 2012, p. 72)

Synchronous tools require a stable internet connection (Aubrey, 2014, p. 53)

The cloud space might be insufficient if the application is used extensively (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 3)

High number of remarks can confuse or overburden the feedback recipients, especially with multiple peer-reviewers

Using Padlet, students may lose track of the comments pinned to their screen (Atwood, 2014, p. 12)

During a synchronous feedback process, students might hesitate to continue their assignment and wait for further feedback (Fuccio, 2014, p. 223)

Requires a great deal of effort, resources, and time (Pedrosa-de-Jesus & Moreira, 2012, p. 57)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

Forum fEEDBACK

  • Summative comments written as forum entries to a forum post
  • Depending on the assignment, can also be used for formative purposes, such as progress report
  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Mostly been used for written feedback to written assignments
  • Mostly peer feedback (e.g. Ekahitanond, 2013) due to its social, collaborative nature
  • Instructor feedback (e.g. Rochera et al., 2021) as a supplement or conclusion of the discussion thread

A variety of subjects, such as

  • EFL (Ekahitanond, 2013),
  • Biology (Pedrosa-de-Jesus & Moreira, 2012),
  • Psychology (Hara, Bonk, & Angeli, 2000; Rochera et al., 2021)
  • Education (Vonderwell, 2003).

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

OPAL forum

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Forum fEEDBACK

Contexts of Use

Dropbox Paper

Etherpad

Google Docs

ZUMPad

A-/synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly One

Local/ Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Peer Feedback

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages& Combinations

Cloud Editor Feedback

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

Video Conference Feedback

Audio Feedback

Video Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Chat Feedback

Suggested Combination:

It is still advisable to set deadlines, as a long time lapse may decrease motivation or disrupt interactions.

Advantage over text editor feedback

Similar to text editor feedback

Advantage over text editor feedback

More time-efficient, as the synchronization allows faster turnaround of feedback (Aubrey, 2014, pp. 47, 52)

The chat option allows teachers to respond to the students’ , making the feedback more conversational (Aubrey, 2014, p. 52). It encourages several feedback cycles between the peers and/ or the instructor (Wood, 2019, pp. 79-80)

Permits asynchronous editing and commenting; documents can be downloaded for further editing offline (Damayanti et al., 2021, p. 229; Fuccio, 2014, p. 220)

Allows teachers to monitor their students while they are working on a task (i.e. drafting a text); they can provide immediate feedback (Aubrey, 2014, p. 47, Sullivan, 2020, p. 669); and they can trace the changes by using the version history feature of e.g. Google Docs (Alharbi, 2019, p. 9)

Teachers and peer-reviewers have time to think deeply about the feedback aspects they want to address (Ebadi & Rahimi, 2017, p. 807)

Easy localization of feedback comments (Fuccio, 2014, p. 209)

Hardly any data loss owing to the continuous automatic saving (Fuccio, 2014. pp. 224-5); external storage devices or the printing are not necessary (Aubrey, 2014, pp. 47, 52); no compatibility problems

Multimedia elements can be inserted (Saeed & Al-Qunayeer, 2020, p. 9) or directly accessed via hyperlinks

Positive perception and higher levels of engagement, especially in peer-reviewing tasks (Alharbi, 2019, p. 8), and positive effects on student’s learning gain (Aydawati, 2019)

Reduces the logistical and emotional burden students might have with face-to-face scenarios

Very interactive as learners can work together in real-time and engage with the comments by instructors and peers (Aubrey, 2014, p. 47; Alharbi, 2020, p. 10; Saeed & Al-Qunayeer, 2020). This can be augmented further by the integrated chat function of e.g. Google Docs

Allows immediate, synchronous feedback from various assessors at the same time (Aubrey, 2014, p. 47), and they can respond to their comments quickly afterwards

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

cloud editor fEEDBACK

Screencast Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Automated Writing Evaluation

Suggested Combination:

Synchronous tools require a stable internet connection (Aubrey, 2014, p. 53)

The cloud space might be insufficient if the application is used extensively (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 3)

The available server space might be limited (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 3)

High number of remarks can confuse or overburden the feedback recipients, especially with multiple peer-reviewers

Each user of the cloud document can edit or delete each other’s content, creating a possible danger of data loss

Immediacy of commenting might lead to many unconnected and spontaneous remarks, decreasing the value and usability of the feedback

During a synchronous feedback process, students might hesitate to continue their assignment and wait for further feedback (Fuccio, 2014, p. 223)

Depending on the application, teachers might need to set up an account (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 4), and these external providers possibly do not fully align with educational institutions’ policies (i.e. regarding data protection)

Not all cloud applications allow in-process commenting and editing, some only allow the upload of documents created in a local text editor (Fuccio, 2014, pp. 222–223). After uploading, conversion problems might occur (i.e. font or formatting changes) (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 4)

Depending on the application, students might need to set up an account (i.e. for Google Docs, students need a valid Google account) (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 4)

Teachers needs to spend time training themselves as well as their students before implementing feedback on e.g. Google Docs (Aubrey, 2014, p. 53)

Synchronous tools require a stable internet connection (Aubrey, 2014, p. 53)

The cloud space might be insufficient if the application is used extensively (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 3)

High number of remarks can confuse or overburden the feedback recipients, especially with multiple peer-reviewers

During a synchronous feedback process, students might hesitate to continue their assignment and wait for further feedback (Fuccio, 2014, p. 223)

Not all cloud applications allow in-process commenting and editing, some only allow the upload of documents created in a local text editor (Fuccio, 2014, pp. 222–223). After uploading, conversion problems might occur (i.e. font or formatting changes) (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 4)

Depending on the application, students might need to set up an account (i.e. for Google Docs, students need a valid Google account) (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 4)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

Cloud editor fEEDBACK

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Similar to text editor feedback, cloud editor feedback is mostly used to provide feedback for written tasks, such as essay, term paper, research proposal, etc.
  • Appear to be particularly suitable for supporting learners in the process of completing a task, for instance when drafting a text.
  • The cloud editor can be used in a variety of different disciplines. Also, teachers can choose different Cloud Applications for feedback depending on the type of assignment.
  • Very useful for peer feedback due to their collaborative functionalities (e.g. Aydawati, 2019; Ebadi & Rahimi, 2017)
  • Teacher feedback (e.g. Saeed & Al Qunayeer, 2020; Shintani & Aubrey, 2016; Yim, Zheng, & Warschauer, 2017).

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

cloud editor fEEDBACK

Google Docs

Contexts of Use

Particify

Synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly One

Feedback Direction:Student to Instructor

Pingo

Mentimeter

Poll Everywhere

Socrative

Local Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages

(Live) Poll Feedback (ARS)

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

Video Conference Feedback

Suggested Combination:

The questions can be easily re-utilized in subsequent seminars and some systems even permit teachers to share their questions with colleagues (Mork, 2014, p. 135, regarding Socrative)

ARS are user-friendly and practical (Mork, 2014, p. 132); they can be used in face-to-face, hybrid and distance learning contexts

The results are displayed instantaneously (Pichardo et al., 2021, pp. 3, 10), which helps teachers gain an insight into students’ understanding (Mork, 2014, p. 134) and helps them adjust their further teaching accordingly (Evans, 2018, p. 29; Pichardo et al., 2021, p. 11)

Compared to hand-held clickers, online ARS are cost- and time-saving because no devices need to be purchased and distributed to the students in class (Little, 2016, p. 1)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

ARS enable an immediate collection of student feedback to particular questions (Chavan et al., 2018, p. 465; Little, 2016; Mork, 2014), which is particularly useful for large classes (Pichardo et al., 2021, p. 12).

ARS typically operate anonymously, giving learners the freedom to express their ideas without being blamed or censored (Pichardo et al., 2021, p. 10), encouraging them to be less afraid of making mistakes in front of teachers and peers (Little, 2016, p. 3)

ARS may enhance self-assessment (Mork, 2014, p. 132), peer reflection and group discussions and thus a more critical engagement with the learning contents (Mork, 2014, p. 133; Pichardo et al., 2021, p. 11)

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Can be highly motivating because students’ knowledge, interests and preferences are acknowledged (Mork, 2014, p. 132; Pichardo et al., 2021, pp. 11, 13), which can lead to higher engagement in the learning process and increased participation in the classes (Evans, 2018, p. 25)

ARS facilitates a “teacher-student dialogue in relation to the teaching-learning process” and learners may thus feel “co-responsible” for the learning success (Pichardo et al., 2021, pp. 11, 13)

All students can participate at the same time, e.g. answering a question does not depend on the teacher selecting a particular person to respond, making it “democratic and inclusive” (Pichardo et al., 2021)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

(live) poll fEEDBACK

ARS tools can also be used to provide peer feedback on other students’ presentations (Mork, 2014, p. 133).

As answers cannot be changed once pressed, the poll may not accurately reflect learners’ knowledge

Requirement for internet-compatible devices as well as internet access might still be a challenge in some regions of the world (Pichardo et al., 2021, p. 16; see also Vallely & Gibson, 2018)

The limited configuration options of the programs (Pichardo et al., 2021, p. 13) as well as the space limitations for open-ended questions (Pichardo et al., 2021, p. 15; Skoyles & Bloxsidge, 2017, p. 236).

Because the feedback is anonymous, teachers cannot relate the responses to individual students (Valley & Gibson, 2018, p. 6), so they are unable to identify those who might need special support

ARS might not be suitable for students with visual impairments or other special needs

Actual impact of ARS on students’ learning gain is unclear (Mork, 2014, p. 129)

Students can only give feedback when teachers allow them to do so (Chavan et al., 2018, p. 465) and the topics are usually determined by the instructor

The quick nature of poll-responses can lead students to pressing the wrong button (Mork, 2014, p. 131). However, after submitting their answer, it can no longer be changed, which can be frustrating (Vallely & Gibson, 2018, p. 6)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

(Live) Poll fEEDBACK

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Mostly used for student to teacher feedback during online classes, video conferences, and face-to-face classes
  • Peer feedback during presentations
  • Help teachers gain imme- diate feedback from their students during a lesson
  • Collect synchronous peer feedback, for example during their presentations

Assignment Types

  • Instant feedback to teachers during classes
  • Quizzing purposes, i.e. to test the learners’ knowledge (Little, 2016, p. 2; Mork, 2014, p. 134)
  • Brainstorming (Mork, 2014, p. 130)
  • Presentations

Subjects/ Disciplines

A variety of fields, such as

  • Engineering (Chavan et al., 2018)
  • Biology (Voelkel & Bennett, 2014)
  • STEM (Evans, 2018)
  • Economics (Reinhardt et al., 2012)
  • Law (Skoyles & Bloxsidge, 2017),
  • Second/ foreign language education (Mork, 2014)

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Live Poll fEEDBACK

Quizlet

Pingo

Contexts of Use

Lime Survey

Smart Survey

Free Online Surveys

Soscisurvey

FeedbackSchule

Survey Monkey

Qualtrics

Google Forms

Asynchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly One

Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Student to Instructor

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages

Disadvantages& Combinations

Survey Feedback

List ofReferences

View and download handouts in English and German

Enhances the learning experience for the students and thus caters for a student-centered teaching environment (Haddad & Kalaani, 2014, p. 9)

Supporting a wide range of question types: closed questions can be analyzed easily by the programs (Vasantha Raju & Harinarayana, 2016, p. 10), and open questions provide insight into what and how teachers could improve (Bir, 2017)

Creation, administration, and analysis of the surveys is fairly fast and convenient (Vasantha Raju & Harinarayana, 2016, p. 2)

Improvement of teaching quality: Survey results can help teachers identify strengths and areas of improvement on a variety of dimensions (Bir, 2017; Kember et al., 2002, pp. 411-412)

Web-based interface allows students to provide their answers from different mobile devices in a user-friendly manner (“anywhere-anytime-access”). Moreover, it gives students sufficient time for reflection (Vasantha Raju & Harinarayana, 2016, pp. 2, 5; cf. Haddad & Kalaani, 2014, p. 8) before sharing their thoughts about the course.

Quicker and more immediate feedback (Huett, 2004, p. 38)

Survey questions may foster students’ metacognitive thinking and could help them take on more responsibility in shaping the learning environment (Haddad & Kalaani, 2014, p. 13)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

Survey fEEDBACK

Cloud Editor Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Teachers might set up a text pad with feedback questions to which every student can respond anonymously at any time as the course evolves.

Ineffective survey designs, such as ambiguous wording (cf. Winstone & Boud, 2019, p. 113) and lacking of full capture of intended construct, can contribute to a “low response rate” (Vasantha Raju & Harinarayana, 2016, p. 11).

Teachers might feel controlled or have negative attitudes towards evaluation surveys if they are used as measures for quality control and tenure (Huxham et al., 2008, p. 676)

Concerns about the anonymity of the surveys, especially in small classes (Bir, 2017).

Long time lapses between survey completion and changes in teaching can aggravate this impression (Winstone & Boud, 2019, p. 112)

Standardized evaluation surveys (e.g. for the entire university) lack flexibility and focus regarding the particularities of individual classrooms (Kember et al., 2002, pp. 421-422), e.g. for appreciating innovative teaching designs (Winstone & Boud, 2019, p. 114)

It usually takes a while until the results from institutionally administered surveys are communicated back to the teachers, thus leaving hardly any time to adjust their teaching (Winstone & Boud, 2019, p. 112)

Students may not take surveys seriously as they doubt if their responses will eventually improve teaching (Huxham et al., 2008, p. 676; Kember et al., 2002, pp. 416-417)

Students could see themselves in surveys more as “passive receivers” instead of “active seekers” of feedback (Winstone & Boud, 2019, p. 115) if their opportunities for feedback are restricted to one-way evaluation surveys (Lake et al., 2017, p. 83)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

survey fEEDBACK

Learner Groups

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • The central aim is to improve the quality of teaching to meet the learners' needs and to reach the learning objectives more effectively
  • Often also relevant for tenure or promotion
  • Usually summative feedback given at the end of the term, though it can also be formative feedback at intermediate points
  • Course evaluation surveys administered by the teacher or institution at the end of a course and/ or at intermediate points in a course
  • Survey feedback can be implemented in all disciplines (cf. Bir, 2017)
  • Any learner group: type, content, difficulty and language of the survey questions can be modified according to learners' needs and background knowledge

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Survey fEEDBACK

Google Forms

Contexts of Use

Definition

WeChat

Twitter

TikTok

WhatsApp

Facebook

Pinterest

YouTube

Instagram

Synchronous/ Asynchronous

Feedback Mode: Mainly Three

Global Feedback

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Peer Feedback

Navigation:

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages

List ofReferences

Social Media Feedback

View and download handouts in English and German

Cloud Editor Feedback

DigiBoard Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Chat Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Social media breaks away from the traditional figure of authority, allowing multiple sources of knowledge and opinions. (Ruiz-Ruiz & Izaguirre, 2022, p. 3218)

Allows students to become content creators, fosters creativity in content creation, enables them to interact and receive feedback from their audience (Ruiz-Ruiz & Izaguirre, 2022, p. 3219)

Contributes to "open, flexible, and decentralized education", incorporating invisible learning into cognitive processes (Ruiz-Ruiz & Izaguirre, 2022, p. 3221)

Enables interaction and engagement beyond classroom.

Positively enhances resource and information sharing among students (Al-Qaysi et al., 2018, p. 2)

Particularly beneficial for students who hesitate to participate in face-to-face activities (Aloraini & Cardoso, 2020, p. 2)

Powerful tools for collaborative learning, leveraging everyday spaces for educational purposes (Ruiz-Ruiz & Izaguirre, 2022)

Facilitates instant feedback exchange while allowing students to stay connected within their social circles. (Arulchelvan et al., 2019; Chintalapati & Daruvi, 2016; Ada et al., 2016)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

SOCIAL MEDIA fEEDBACK

Psychological resistance from the students

Challenges the traditional teacher-student relationship (Perez et al., 2023)

Privacy threats (Perez et al., 2023)

Reluctant to embrace new forms of teaching, lacking of time to learn and develop new skills (Ada et al., 2016, p. 82)

Perceived risks, such as institutional issues, pedagogical views, pragmatic reasons, and values (Perez et al., 2023, p. 2)

Erosion of teachers' traditional roles (Perez et al., 2023, p. 2)

No conclusive results regarding the effectiveness of social media for feedback purposes. (Ruiz-Ruiz & Izaguirre, 2022; Mnkandla & Minnaar, 2017, Al-Qaysi et al., 2018; Perez et al., 2023)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

social media fEEDBACK

YouTube

Twitter

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Mostly adopted in higher education and professional education settings, though students from other levels were also seen in studies (e.g. in Arulchelvan et al., 2019)
  • Suitable for formative and summative purposes.
  • Because of its instancy and interactivity, it is useful for feedback from different directions, including teacher feedback, peer feedback, student feedback, or a combination of these.

Subjects/ Disciplines

  • A great variety of disciplines, such as language learning (Tran & Pham, 2022), teacher education (Suana et al., 2019; Lin et al., 2013), accounting (Liu, 2018), engineering (Evans, 2013), nursing (Almutairi et al., 2022), etc.

Assignment Types

  • All different kinds of assignments, including but not limited to written tasks, video/ audio tasks, designing/ illustration/ creative tasks, group work. “The educational content shared on social media can be any form of text, audio or video, etc.” (Sengupta & Vaish, 2023, p. 2)

TikTok

Instagram

Facebook

Application name

Watch video tutorials on YouTube

View/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Social media fEEDBACK

Contexts of Use

TaskCards

Dotstorming

Wakelet

Jamboard

Padlet

Miro

Synchronous/ Asynchronous

Feedback Mode: Mainly Three

Local/ Global

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Peer Feedback

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

Advantages& Combinations

Disadvantages

List ofReferences

Digital Board Feedback

View and download handouts in English and German

Screencast Feedback

Text Editor Feedback

Audio Feedback

Video Feedback

Suggested Combination:

Padlet is accessible on various devices, and provides free sign-up and three free Padlet walls for usage (Lyn, 2022).

Padlet offers a range of privacy settings and data analytics (McLachlan & Tippett, 2023).

It serves as a convenient tool for cooperative learning, enabling the creation of diverse projects (Bodnenkol et al., 2020).

Can be used as an interactive assessment tool (Jong & Tan, 2021)

Facilitates peer assessment (Ali, 2021, p. 4) and offers various convenient features, such as saving as electronic documents, email sharing, embedding, mobile usage, and creating QR codes (Bodnenkol et al., 2020)

The accessibility of materials is made easy through Padlet (Ahmad et al., 2022; McLachlan & Tippett, 2023).

User-friendly (Lyn, 2022, p.2) and time-efficient (Indrasari, 2019, p. 98) for collecting a large amount of feedback

Students' engagement and motivation increase when using Padlet (Ali, 2021; Ferro, 2018; Holovina, 2021).

Enables collaborative work and discussions for distance communication, allowing students to engage both synchronously and asynchronously (Ahmad et al., 2022; Bodnenkol et al., 2020; Holovina, 2021)

Students can participate and ask questions anonymously (Ali, 2021, p. 3).

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

digital board fEEDBACK

Without appropriate structure, students may lose track of the comments pinned to their screen

High number of remarks can confuse or overburden the feedback recipients, especially with multiple peer-reviewers

The free version of Padlet is limited to the usage of only three Padlet walls

Privacy concerns about the use of tools that are external to the learning management system (LMS), with some expressing worries about data protection (England, 2017).

The implementation of digital board feedback might pose greater challenges in larger courses (Ali, 2021, p. 4).

It is essential for students to acquire knowledge on harnessing the full benefits of Padlet to enhance their English and collaboration skills, as well as to foster autonomous learning (Lien et al., 2022, p. 14)

Students might need more guidance on structuring their remarks to be constructive rather than preachy or overly negative (Awaludin et al., 2017).

Instructors need to take into account students' device availability and internet connectivity when using digital board feedback (England, 2017, p. 59).

The cloud space might be insufficient if the application is used extensively (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 3)

High number of remarks can confuse or overburden the feedback recipients, especially with multiple peer-reviewers

During a synchronous feedback process, students might hesitate to continue their assignment and wait for further feedback (Fuccio, 2014, p. 223)

Depending on the application, students might need to set up an account (i.e. for Google Docs, students need a valid Google account) (Firth & Mesureur, 2010, p. 4)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

Digital board fEEDBACK

  • Suitable for formative feedback during the process of peer project. Teacher summative feedback can be provided at the end of the project as a complement to the peer feedback.
  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Can be used for various learner groups
  • Mostly used for peer feedback
  • Mostly used in ESL and ELT (Awaludin et al., 2017; Ahmad et al., 2022), but studies have also been done in other disciplines, such as business communication (Leslie & Johnson, 2022) and biology (Subramanian & Fadzil, 2021)

Subjects/ Disciplines

  • Due to digital board applications’ “features and appropriateness as a language learning, collaborative, and assessment Web 2.0 tool” (Lyn, 2022, p. 2), it is very suitable for peer feedback during collaborative learning.
  • Although most studies used it for written assignments, its ability to upload multimedia files can also make it useful for other types of assignments.

Miro

Padlet

Application name

Watch video tutorials on YouTube

View/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Assignment Types

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

digital board fEEDBACK

Contexts of Use

Siri

Liulishuo

Mondly

Alexa

Bing.ai

Bard

ChatGPT

Claude

Synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly One

Local/ Global

Mostly used platforms:

Feedback Direction:Self Feedback

Navigation:

Definition

Contexts of Use

List ofReferences

Advantages

Disadvantages& Combinations

View and download handouts in English and German

Chatbot Feedback

Enhances social interaction (Ruan et al., 2021, p. 434) and language skills (Haristiani, 2019, p. 4), useful for foreign language learning (Fryer et al., 2020, p. 16)

Promotes learning achievement and self-efficacy, stimulates questions from students (Essel et al., 2022, p. 4)

Reduces teacher workload by answering repetitive questions (Haristiani, 2019, p. 5)

Provides personalized formative feedback to students in real-time, catering to their individual learning needs and pace (Mageira et al., 2022; Lo, 2023)

ChatGPT generates natural-sounding and context-specific responses, advancing the knowledge of textual feedback generation in chatbots (Dai et al., 2023, p. 1)

Simple and intuitive user interfaces (Essel et al., 2022, p. 2)

Acts as a valuable data analysis tool (Mageira et al., 2022, p. 3) and an intermediary between students and teachers (Essel et al., 2022, p. 4).

ChatGPT provides interactive and process-focused feedback to guide students' improvement and skill development (Dai et al., 2023, p. 5).

Provides engaging and fun experiences (Ruan et al., 2021, p. 434) across multiple devices via text or audio (Fryer et al., 2017, pp. 8-9)

Offers comfortable, efficient and speedy assistance accessible anywhere and anytime (Adamopoulou & Moussiades, 2020; Fryer et al., 2017; Haristiani, 2019)

Reduces students' fear of making mistakes and appearing less competent (Fryer et al., 2020, p. 16), promoting confidence and reducing anxiety (Ruan et al., 2021, p. 435)

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

chatbot fEEDBACK

The integration of ChatGPT with Bing search can lessen this issue to a certain extent.

Automated Writing Evaluation

Suggested Combination:

Students' errors in spelling, phrase misuse, poor intonation, and incorrect pronunciation (Adamopoulou & Moussiades, 2020, p. 13) can result in chatbots generating incorrect responses. Some chatbots struggle to answer complex or unexpected questions (Mageira et al., 2022, p. 3), causing frustration for students

Some chatbot services, such as ChatGPT's premium version, come with a cost and are not entirely free.

Novelty effects may wear off, leading to decreased engagement and motivation over time (Fryer et al., 2020, p. 16); "long-term learning has not been studied in detail" (Ruan et al., 2021, p. 435)

The effectiveness of chatbots depends on the quality and quantity of information and knowledge they possess based on their or data collection mechanism (Chang et al., 2022, p. 17; see also in Kuhail et al., 2022)

Cultural biases can be present in chatbots due to the source database and algorithms used. This bias is evident when translating text from an English corpus to other languages (Kohnke et al., 2023).

Ethical concerns arise regarding the potential for chatbots, like ChatGPT, to be exploited for cheating in assessments (Kohnke et al., 2023)

Teachers require specific skills to effectively utilize chatbots for teaching and learning purposes (Essel et al., 2022, p. 15).

The unsupervised generation of feedback by chatbots like ChatGPT raises concerns about their accuracy and originality (Dai et al., 2023); lacking of sources or citations for its information (Kohnke et al., 2023).

Lack of empathy and personality in chatbots (Adamopoulou & Moussiades, 2020) may result in a less engaging and supportive learning experience for students

Concerns about privacy and data security arise when students interact with chatbots (Adamopoulou & Moussiades, 2020, p. 13)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

chatbot fEEDBACK

Watch more video tutorials on YouTube

View/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Rehearse Coach

Kansei App

  • Online Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Mostly used for instant formative feedback during the learning process
  • Various proficiency levels
  • Self feedback
  • Complement to teacher feedback during online learning or face-to-face classes with large amount of students
  • Depending on the types of AI apps and chatbots, they can be used for a great range of assignments. For example, ChatGPT for written assignments, Mondly and Duolingo for learning grammar and vocabulary, Liulishuo for oral practices, etc.
  • Due to the chatbot’s chatting function, it has been mostly used for language learning (Haristiani, 2019)
  • With its quick development, chatbots can now be used in many other subjects, such as computer science (Abbasi et al., 2019), nursing (Chang et al., 2022), engineering (Kohnke et al., 2023), etc.

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

ChatGPT

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

chatbot fEEDBACK

Contexts of Use

Definition

Synchronous Feedback

Feedback Mode: Mainly Three

Global Feedback

Feedback Direction:Self Feedback

Navigation:

Contexts of Use

List ofReferences

Advantages

Disadvantages& Combinations

Robot Feedback

View and download handouts in English and German

Provides social interaction and emotional support

Supports critical thinking and complex problem-solving skills (Augello et al., 2020, p. 1)

Creates a more human-like, sociable, and creative learning experience compared to traditional digital tools like tablets (Zhexenova et al., 2020, p. 4).

Promising tools for promoting inclusive education, catering to the diverse learning abilities of students (Giannandrea et al., 2021, p. 38)

Offers practical yet enjoyable activities, creating a participatory environment that keeps students interested and engaged in their learning (Chatzichristofis, 2023, p. 4)

Reduces teacher workload, allows teachers to dedicate more time to content delivery and creative instruction (Zhexenova et al., 2020, p. 4)

Not judgmental like human beings, making it easier for students to accept negative feedback (Miden & Ham, 2014, p. 337; Zhexenova et al., 2020, p. 3)

Welcomed by students as as interactive learning partners, engaging students in adaptive activities (Zhexenova et al., 2020, p. 3)

Provides accessible and immediate feedback that is motivating (Sapounidis & Alimisis, 2020), interactive (Zhexenova et al., 2020), friendly, and responsive (Rosenberg-Kima et al., 2019).

Unlike human instructors, robots do not experience fatigue, ensuring constant availability for students' educational needs (Park et al., 2011, p. 135)

Has the ability to tailor feedback strategies according to students' preferences, improving the effectiveness of the feedback process (de Haas et al., 2020, p. 16).

For Teachers

For Students

Advantages

robot fEEDBACK

Robots may struggle to communicate and respond appropriately in group settings (Rosenberg-Kima et al., 2019, p. 9)

Novelty effects may influnce task motivation (de Haas & Conijn, 2020, p. 2)

Development and maintenance of educational robots can be expensive for teachers and educational institutions (Ajwad et al., 2017, p. 19)

Students engage differently with robots, which can affect the effectiveness of the feedback provided (de Haas et al., 2020, p. 4)

Limited evidence available from studies to draw a conclusion about the effectiveness of educational robots in improving students' learning outcomes (Anwar et al., 2019, p. 20)

Teachers may lack the necessary skills in ICT and perceive robot activities as too complex for their competences (Giannandrea et al., 2021, p. 38; see also Sapounidis & Alimisis, 2020, p. 11)

Students may perceive robots as machines rather than as human-like social agents, impacting their acceptance and response to robot-based feedback (Rosenberg-Kima, et al., 2019, p. 9).

Robots cannot replicate human facial expressions and subtle cues, limiting their ability to provide non-verbal feedback effectively (de Haas et al., 2020, p. 2)

For Teachers

For Students

Disadvantages

robot fEEDBACK

  • Depending on the configuration of the robot, different assignment types are possible
  • Face-to-face Class
  • Hybrid Class
  • Blended Learning
  • Depending on the learning activities, robots can provide formative feedback during the learning process and summative feedback at then end of the task
  • Depending on the learning activities, robots can be a peer (learning companion) for peer feedback, or an instructor assistant (learning tutor) for instructor feedback, or used for self-feedback during robot assisted training.
  • All grades from Pre-K, K-12 to higher education
  • Suitable for a variety of subjects, but several studies primarily focused on teaching STEM-related subjects. Moreover, social robots are often used for language learning because of its ability to provide social interactions

Assignment Types

Subjects/ Disciplines

Click the items below to view/ download written manuals on Google Drive

Sample Tasks & Manuals

Learner Groups

Learning Objectives

Learning Environment

Humanoid Robot Pepper

robot fEEDBACK

Contexts of Use

(Adamopoulou & Moussiades, 2020, p. 1; Chang et al., 2022, p. 15; Yin et al., 2021, p. 155)

Chatbot Feedback

Chatbot feedback refers to the use of artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots to provide text or oral feedback to students in educational settings. These chatbots utilize Natural Language Processing (NLP) and sentiment analysis to analyze student input and provide personalized feedback on assignments, quizzes, or other learning tasks. The chatbot feedback system aims to simulate human-like interaction, offering students timely and constructive feedback, answering their questions, and assisting them in their learning process.

Feedback criteria refer to the distinction between local and/or global issues that are addressed by the feedback (Nelson & Schunn, 2009, p. 380). Local or “lower-order” issues, include mechanical aspects of spelling and punctuation as well as grammar and word choice, whereas global or “higher-order” issues, comprise coherence, argumentation, organization and idea development, etc. (e.g. Chang, 2016, p. 82; Min, 2005, p. 298).

References: Chang, C. Y.-h. (2016). Two decades of research in L2 peer review. Journal of Writing Research, 8(1), S. 81–117. Min, H.-T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33(2), S. 293–308. doi:10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003 Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), S. 375–401. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x

(Scaradozzi et al., 2019, p. 67; Li et al., 2019, p. 2)

Robot Feedback

Robot feedback refers to the responses and guidance provided by humanoid robots serving as learning assistants or teaching assistants. These robots, known as social robots, interact with students in a natural and interpersonal manner to deliver educational content. They can be companions to both students and teachers, facilitating various learning activities while accommodating students with physical disabilities or social impairments.

Diese Maßnahme wird mitfinanziert durch Steuermittel auf der Grundlage des von den Abgeordneten des Sächsischen Landtags beschlossenen Haushaltes. Digital Transfer Fellowship des Sächsischen Staatsministeriums für Wissenschaft, Kultur und Tourismus (SMWK): "Transfer transdisziplinär: Digitaler Feedbackdialog zur Unterstützung von Lehr- und Lernprozessen in den Geistes- und Naturwissenschaften" (Jennifer Schluer, TU Chemnitz & Monique Meier, TU Dresden)

TESOL TU Chemnitz (Jun.-Prof. Dr. Jennifer Schluer)

Projektinformation

Finanzierung

Do you have any further tips or suggestions? Would you like to share your own teaching experiences with us? Give us feedback: tesol[at]phil.tu-chemnitz.de Chemnitz University of Technology Faculty of Humanities English Department Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL)/ Advanced Academic English Jun.-Prof. Dr. Jennifer Schluer Reichenhainer Str. 39 D-09126 Chemnitz, Germany https://www.tu-chemnitz.de/phil/english/sections/tesol/

Contact Us