Advertisement

Using feedback to promote student participation in online learning programs: evidence from a quasi-experimental study

  • Jessica LiEmail author
  • Seohyun Claire Wong
  • Xue Yang
  • Allison Bell
Development Article
  • 81 Downloads

Abstract

How should learner analytics and different media be used to optimize feedback to increase students’ motivation and sense of learning community in online learning programs? This study was designed to examine the usage of feedback delivery methods (text only, video only, or both) and learner analytics (individual vs. class average) to answer the above question. Two consecutive surveys were administrated to the students of a series of online courses over four semesters which resulted in a sample of 96. Using this quasi-experimental design, we aimed to capture changes in students’ perceived feedback quality, motivation, and sense of learning community when different feedback delivery methods and learner analytics were introduced. The findings revealed that students who received both video and text feedback were least motivated and lowest in their sense of online learning community when compared with students who received just video or text feedback. No significant differences were found between students who received video or text feedback regarding motivation and their sense of learning community. The findings also showed that when sharing class average, students’ motivation decreased. This study provides insights into how instructors might use media and learner analytics when designing feedback to motivate and promote student learning in online learning programs.

Keywords

Student feedback Motivation Online learning community Learner analytics Video feedback Online learning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the Journal Editor and anonymous referees for their useful suggestions and comments.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

All authors have reviewed and agreed with the manuscript at this current form to submit for the consideration of possible publication by ETR&D. The authors declare that we have complied with the ethical standards outlined by the journal, and there is no conflict of interest, and no grant or other financial support received for this study.

References

  1. Allen, I., & Seaman, J. (2007). Making the grade: Online education in the United States, 2006. Newburyport, MA. Retrieved December 15, 2018 from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED530101.
  2. Atwater, C., Borup, J., Baker, R., & West, R. E. (2017). Student perceptions of video communication in an online sport and recreation studies graduate course. Human Kinetics Journals, 11(1), 3–12.  https://doi.org/10.1123/smej.2016-0002.Google Scholar
  3. Biesinger, K., & Crippen, K. (2010). The effects of feedback protocol on self-regulated learning in a web-based worked example learning environment. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1470–1482.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.013.Google Scholar
  4. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102.Google Scholar
  5. Borup, J., West, R. E., & Graham, C. R. (2012). Improving online social presence through asynchronous video. Internet and Higher Education, 15(3), 195–203.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.11.001.Google Scholar
  6. Bower, M. (2005). Online assessment feedback: Competitive, individualistic, or… preferred form! Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 24(2), 121–147. Retrieved Novermber 1, 2018 from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ724773.
  7. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental design for research. Handbook of Research on Teaching.  https://doi.org/10.1037/022808.
  8. Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1–32.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9.Google Scholar
  9. Chan, J. C. Y., & Lam, S. F. (2010). Effects of different evaluative feedback on students’ self-efficacy in learning. Instructional Science, 38(1), 37–58.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9077-2.Google Scholar
  10. Crook, A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson, C., Drinkwater, R., Lundqvist, K., et al. (2012). The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students? Computers & Education, 58(1), 386–396.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.025.Google Scholar
  11. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1994). Promoting self-determined education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 38(1), 3–14.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0031383940380101.Google Scholar
  12. Draus, P. J., Curran, M. J., & Trempus, M. S. (2014). The influence of instructor-generated video content on student satisfaction with and engagement in asynchronous online classes. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 10(2), 240–254. Retrieved January 5, 2018 from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol10no2/draus_0614.pdf.
  13. Drouin, M. A. (2008). The relationship between students’ perceived sense of community and satisfaction, achievement, and retention in an online course. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(3), 267–284. Retrieved October 5, 2018 from http://www.anitacrawley.net/Resources/Articles/THERELATIONSHIPBETWEENSTUDENTS%92.pdf.
  14. Edouard, G. (2015). Effectiveness of audio feedback in distance education. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 12(4), 41–48. Retrieved September 6, 2018 from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Apr_15/Apr15.pdf#page=45.
  15. Falvo, D. A., & Solloway, S. (2004). Constructing community in a graduate course about teaching with technology. TechTrends, 48(5), 54–62.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02763532.Google Scholar
  16. Garrison, D. R. (1997). Self-directed learning: Toward a comprehensive model. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(1), 18–33.  https://doi.org/10.1177/074171369704800103.Google Scholar
  17. Garrison, D. R. (2009). Implications of online learning for the conceptual development and practice of distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 93–104. Retrieved November 5, 2018 from http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/471/888.
  18. Gaševic, D., Dawson, S., & Siemens, G. (2015). Let’s not forget: Learning analytics are about learning. TechTrends, 59(1), 64–71.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0822-x.Google Scholar
  19. Griffiths, M. E., & Graham, C. R. (2009). Using asynchronous video in online classes: Results from a pilot study. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(3), 65–76. Retrieved December 5, 2018 from http://69.36.77.223/Journal/Mar_09/Mar_09.pdf#page=69.
  20. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.  https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.Google Scholar
  21. Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51–66.  https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.v0i0.1878.Google Scholar
  22. Huett, J. B., Kalinowski, K. E., Moller, L., & Huett, K. C. (2008). Improving the motivation and retention of online students through the use of ARCS-based e-mails. American Journal of Distance Education, 22(3), 159–176.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640802224451.Google Scholar
  23. Hung, S. T. A. (2016). Enhancing feedback provision through multimodal video technology. Computers & Education, 98, 90–101.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.009.Google Scholar
  24. Ice, P., Curtis, R., Phillips, P., & Wells, J. (2007). Using asynchronous audio feedback to enhance teaching presence and students’ sense of community. Journal of Asynchronous Learning, 11(2), 3–25. Retrieved October 5, 2017 from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ842694.
  25. Johnson, M. (2016). Feedback effectiveness in professional learning contexts. Review of Education, 4(2), 195–229.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3061.Google Scholar
  26. Kauffman, H. (2015). A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23(1063519), 1–13.  https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.26507.Google Scholar
  27. Keller, J. M. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and e3-learning. Distance Education, 29(2), 175–185.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910802154970.Google Scholar
  28. Keller, J. M. (2010). Tools to support motivational design. Motivational design for learning and performance (pp. 267–295). Boston, MA: Springer.Google Scholar
  29. LaBarbera, R. (2013). The relationship between students’ perceived sense of connectedness to the instructor and satisfaction in online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 14(4), 209–220. Retrieved October 7, 2017 from https://search.proquest.com/openview/eb763bf44b995ec2c32bd2eff99fd8d0/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=29705.
  30. Lederman, D. (2018). Who is studying online (and where)? Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved October 7, 2017 from https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2018/01/05/new-us-data-show-continued-growth-college-students-studying.
  31. Lee, I. (2017). Classroom writing assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts. Singapore: Springer Singapore.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3924-9.Google Scholar
  32. Long, P. D., & Siemens, G. (2014). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(3), 132–137.  https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/195.Google Scholar
  33. Macfadyen, L. P., & Dawson, S. (2010). Mining LMS data to develop an “early warning system” for educators: A proof of concept. Computers & Education, 54(2), 588–599.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.008.Google Scholar
  34. Martocchio, J. J., & Webster, J. (1992). Effects of feedback and cognitive playfulness on performance in microcomputer software training. Personnel Psychology, 45(3), 553–578.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1992.tb00860.x.Google Scholar
  35. Mathieson, K. (2012). Exploring student perceptions of audiovisual feedback via screencasting in online courses. American Journal of Distance Education, 26(3), 143–156.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2012.689166.Google Scholar
  36. McCarthy, J. (2015). Evaluating written, audio and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 153–169. Retrieved October 7, 2017 from http://www.iier.org.au/iier25/mccarthy.html.
  37. Moore, M. G. (2013). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (2nd ed., pp. 84–103). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Morueta, R. T., López, P. M., Gómez, Á. H., & Harris, V. W. (2016). Exploring social and cognitive presences in communities of inquiry to perform higher cognitive tasks. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 122–131.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.07.004.Google Scholar
  39. Neighbors, C., Lewis, M. A., Bergstrom, R. L., & Larimer, M. E. (2006). Being controlled by normative influences: Self-determination as a moderator of a normative feedback alcohol intervention. Health Psychology, 25(5), 571–579.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.25.5.571.Google Scholar
  40. Nicol, D., & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090.Google Scholar
  41. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  42. Picciano, A. G. (2012). The evolution of big data and learning analytics in American higher education. Online Learning, 16(3), 9–20.  https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v16i3.267.Google Scholar
  43. Ramaprasad, A. (1983). On the definition of feedback. Behavioral Science, 28(1), 4–13.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830280103.Google Scholar
  44. Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 7(1), 68–88.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.03.021.Google Scholar
  45. Robb, C. A., & Sutton, J. (2014). The Importance of social presence and motivation in distance learning. The Journal of Technology, Management, and Applied Engineering, 30(2), 2–10. Retrieved October 7, 2017 from https://www.atmae.org/resource/resmgr/articles/robb___sutton-the_importance.pdf.
  46. Romero, C., López, M. I., Luna, J. M., & Ventura, S. (2013). Predicting students’ final performance from participation in on-line discussion forums. Computers & Education, 68, 458–472.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.009.Google Scholar
  47. Rovai, A. P. (2002a). Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(3), 197–211.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00102-1.Google Scholar
  48. Rovai, A. P. (2002b). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 319–332.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00130-6.Google Scholar
  49. Scagnoli, N. I., Choo, J., & Tian, J. (2017). Students’ insights on the use of video lectures in online classes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 399–414.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12572.Google Scholar
  50. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795.Google Scholar
  51. Siemens, G. (2013). Learning analytics: The emergence of a discipline. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1380–1400.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213498851.Google Scholar
  52. Silva, M. L. (2012). Camtasia in the classroom: Student attitudes and preferences for video commentary or Microsoft Word comments during the revision process. Computers and Composition, 29(1), 1–22.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2011.12.001.Google Scholar
  53. Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information, 2(1), 23–49.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1463631022000005016.Google Scholar
  54. Tempelaar, D. T., Rienties, B., & Giesbers, B. (2015). In search for the most informative data for feedback generation: Learning analytics in a data-rich context. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 157–167.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.038.Google Scholar
  55. Thoms, B. (2011). A dynamic social feedback system to support learning and social interaction in higher education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(4), 340–352.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2011.9.Google Scholar
  56. Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41(1), 19–31.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4101_4.Google Scholar
  57. Verbert, K., Duval, E., Klerkx, J., Govaerts, S., & Santos, J. L. (2013). Learning analytics dashboard applications. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1500–1509.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479363.Google Scholar
  58. Wei, C.-W., Chen, N.-S., & Kinshuk, (2012). A model for social presence in online classrooms. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(3), 529–545.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9234-9.Google Scholar
  59. William, D. (2013). Formative assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment (pp. 165–166). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  60. Wise, A. (2014). Designing pedagogical interventions to support student use of learning analytics. Proceedins of the Fourth International Conference on Learning Analytics And Knowledge - LAK ’14 (pp. 203–211). New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  61. Wise, A., Zhao, Y., & Hausknecht, S. (2014). Learning analytics for online discussions: Embedded and extracted approaches. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(2), 48–71.  https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2014.12.4.Google Scholar
  62. Yuan, J., & Kim, C. (2014). Guidelines for facilitating the development of learning communities in online courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(3), 220–232.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12042.Google Scholar
  63. Yuan, J., & Kim, C. (2015). Effective feedback design using free technologies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 52(3), 408–434.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115571929.Google Scholar
  64. Zhao, C.-M., & Kuh, G. D. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 115–138.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RIHE.0000015692.88534.de.Google Scholar
  65. Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3–17.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_2.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations