Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Learning, Design, and Technology pp 1–45Cite as

Technology and Feedback Design

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:

Abstract

This chapter provides a synthesis of recent research into how technology can support effective feedback. It begins by adopting a definition of feedback in line with recent advances in feedback research. Rather than viewing feedback as mere information provision, feedback is viewed as an active process that students undertake using information from a variety of sources. The results of a systematic literature search into technology and feedback are then presented, structured around the parties involved in feedback: students, their peers, educators, and computers. The specific feedback technologies focused on include digital recordings; bug in ear technologies; automated feedback; and intelligent tutoring systems. Based on this synthesis of the literature, benefits, challenges and design implications are presented for key feedback technologies. The chapter concludes with a discussion of improved feedback approaches that are likely to be enabled by technology in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Aguaded Gómez, J. I., López Meneses, E., & Jaén Martínez, A. (2013). University e-portfolios as a new higher education teaching method. The development of a multimedia educational material (MEM). RUSC, 10(1), 188–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, I., Espasa, A., & Guasch, T. (2012). The value of feedback in improving collaborative writing assignments in an online learning environment. Studies in Higher Education, 37(4), 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.510182.

  • Andrichuk, G. (2016). Perceptions of peer review using cloud-based software. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 25(2), 109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anson, I. G. (2015). Assessment feedback using Screencapture Technology in Political Science. Journal of Political Science Education, 11(4), 375–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2015.1063433.

  • Bai, L., & Hu, G. (2017). In the face of fallible AWE feedback: How do students respond? Educational Psychology, 37(1), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2016.1223275.

  • Bälter, O., Enström, E., & Klingenberg, B. (2013). The effect of short formative diagnostic web quizzes with minimal feedback. Computers & Education, 60(1), 234–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, S. (2012). A video recording and viewing protocol for student group presentations: Assisting self-assessment through a wiki environment. Computers & Education, 59(3), 855–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, R. (2012). Uses of digital tools and literacies in the English language arts classroom. Research in the Schools, 19(1), 45–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beckers, J., Dolmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. (2016). e-pPortfolios enhancing Students’ self-directed learning: A systematic review of influencing factors. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2), 32–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S., Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Boud, D., & Molloy, E. K. (2017). How technology shapes assessment design: Findings from a study of university teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48, 672–682. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12439.

  • Boldrini, E., & Cattaneo, A. (2014). Scaffolding collaborative reflective writing in a VET curriculum. Vocations and Learning, 7(2), 145–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borup, J., West, R. E., & Thomas, R. (2015). The impact of text versus video communication on instructor feedback in blended courses. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(2), 161–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D. (1995). Enhancing learning through self assessment. Philadelphia, PA: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boud, D., & Molloy, E. K. (2013). Feedback in higher and professional education. Oxon, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourgault, A. M., Mundy, C., & Joshua, T. (2013). Comparison of audio vs. written feedback on clinical assignments of nursing students. Nursing Education Perspectives, 34(1), 43–46. https://doi.org/10.5480/1536-5026-34.1.43.

  • Carruthers, C., McCarron, B., Bolan, P., Devine, A., McMahon-Beattie, U., & Burns, A. (2015). ‘I like the sound of that’ – An evaluation of providing audio feedback via the virtual learning environment for summative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(3), 352–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.917145.

  • Cavanaugh, A. J., & Song, L. (2014). Audio feedback versus written feedback: Instructors’ and Students’ perspectives. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C.-C., Liang, C., & Chen, Y.-H. (2013). Is learner self-assessment reliable and valid in a web-based portfolio environment for high school students? Computers & Education, 60(1), 325–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, N., Watson, A. B., Bakerson, M. A., Williams, E. E., McGoron, F. X., & Spitzer, B. (2012). Electronic feedback or handwritten feedback: What do undergraduate students prefer and why. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 1(1), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapelle, C. A., Cotos, E., & Lee, J. (2015). Validity arguments for diagnostic assessment using automated writing evaluation. Language Testing, 32(3), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214565386.

  • Chew, E. (2014). “To listen or to read?” audio or written assessment feedback for international students in the UK. On the Horizon, 22(2), 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1108/oth-07-2013-0026.

  • Choi, I.-C. (2016). Efficacy of an ICALL tutoring system and process-oriented corrective feedback. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 334–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, Y.-S., Yang, H.-C., Tseng, S.-S., & Yang, C.-C. (2014). Implementation of a model-tracing-based learning diagnosis system to promote elementary students’ learning in mathematics. Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 347–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chui, L., Martin, K., & Pike, B. (2013). A quasi-experimental assessment of interactive student response systems on student confidence, effort, and course performance. Journal of Accounting Education, 31(1), 17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciftci, H., & Kocoglu, Z. (2012). Effects of peer E-feedback on Turkish EFL students’ writing performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 61–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, J. L., & Boud, D. (2016). Refocusing portfolio assessment: Curating for feedback and portrayal. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2016.1250664.

  • Demirbilek, M. (2015). Social media and peer feedback: What do students really think about using wiki and Facebook as platforms for peer feedback? Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(3), 211–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denton, D. W. (2014). Using screen capture feedback to improve academic performance. TechTrends, 58(6), 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0803-0.

  • Denton, P., & Rowe, P. (2015). Using statement banks to return online feedback: Limitations of the transmission approach in a credit-bearing assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(8), 1095–1103. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.970124.

  • DePaolo, C. A., & Wilkinson, K. (2014). Recurrent online quizzes: Ubiquitous tools for promoting student presence, participation and performance. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 10, 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Lauro, F., & Johinke, R. (2017). Employing Wikipedia for good not evil: Innovative approaches to collaborative writing assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 478–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1127322.

  • Eddy, P. L., & Lawrence, A. (2012). Wikis as platforms for authentic assessment. Innovative Higher Education, 38(4), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-012-9239-7.

  • Ekahitanond, V. (2013). Promoting university students’ critical thinking skills through peer feedback activity in an online discussion forum. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 59(2), 247–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2016). Supporting second language writing using multimodal feedback. Foreign Language Annals, 49(1), 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12183.

  • Ertmer, P. A., Richardson, J. C., Belland, B., Camin, D., Connolly, P., Coulthard, G., … Mong, C. (2007). Using peer feedback to enhance the quality of student online postings: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 412–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fawcett, H., & Oldfield, J. (2016). Investigating expectations and experiences of audio and written assignment feedback in first-year undergraduate students. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(1), 79–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabaudan, O. (2013). E-xperience erasmus: Online Journaling as a tool to enhance students’ learning experience of their study visit abroad (p. 5): Research-publishing.net. La Grange des Noyes, 25110 Voillans, France.

  • Gasevic, D., Kovanovic, V., Joksimovic, S., & Siemens, G. (2014). Where is research on massive open online courses headed? A data analysis of the MOOC research initiative. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(5). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i5.1954.

  • Ghahri, F., Hashamdar, M., & Mohamadi, Z. (2015). Technology: A better teacher in writing skill. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(7), 1495–1500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, L., & Musti-Rao, S. (2015). Using technology to enhance feedback to student teachers. Intervention in School and Clinic, 51(5), 307–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451215606694.

  • Gould, J., & Day, P. (2013). Hearing you loud and clear: Student perspectives of audio feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(5), 554–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.660131.

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.

  • Hawkins, S. C., Osborne, A., Schofield, S. J., Pournaras, D. J., & Chester, J. F. (2012). Improving the accuracy of self-assessment of practical clinical skills using video feedback – The importance of including benchmarks. Medical Teacher, 34(4), 279–284. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.658897.

  • Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2014). Technology enhanced feedback on assessment. Paper presented at the Australian Computers in Eductional Conference 2013, Adelaide, SA. http://acec2014.acce.edu.au

  • 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.1878.

  • Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2015). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946.

  • Ho, M.-c. (2015). The effects of face-to-face and computer-mediated peer review on EFL writers’ comments and revisions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, K., Chen, C.-H., Wu, W.-S., & Chen, W.-Y. (2015). Interactivity of question prompts and feedback on secondary students’ science knowledge acquisition and cognitive load. Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 159–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, S.-C. (2016). Understanding learners’ self-assessment and self-feedback on their foreign language speaking performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 803–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, G. (2011). Towards a personal best: A case for introducing ipsative assessment in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36(3), 353–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.486859.

  • Hung, S.-T. A. (2016). Enhancing feedback provision through multimodal video technology. Computers & Education, 98, 90–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung, W.-C., Smith, T. J., & Smith, C. M. (2015). Design and usability assessment of a dialogue-based cognitive tutoring system to model expert problem solving in research design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 82–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Israel, M., & Moshirnia, A. (2012). Interacting and learning together: Factors influencing preservice teachers’ perceptions of academic wiki use. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 20(2), 151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, J., & Yu, Y. (2014). The effectiveness of internet-based peer feedback training on Chinese EFL college students’ writing proficiency. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 10(3), 34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, G. M., & Cooke, A. (2016). Self-regulation of learning and preference for written versus audio-recorded feedback by distance education students. Distance Education, 37(1), 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2015.1081737.

  • Jones, N., Georghiades, P., & Gunson, J. (2012). Student feedback via screen capture digital video: Stimulating student’s modified action. Higher Education, 64(5), 593–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9514-7.

  • Jonsson, A. (2013). Facilitating productive use of feedback in higher education. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14(1), 63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabilan, M. K., & Khan, M. A. (2012). Assessing pre-service English language teachers’ learning using E-portfolios: Benefits, challenges and competencies gained. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1007–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kachingwe, A. F., Phillips, B., & Beling, J. (2015). Videotaping practical examinations in physical therapist education: Does it Foster student performance, self-assessment, professionalism, and improve instructor grading? Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 29(1), 25–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, L., O’Neil, K., & Kwon, E. H. (2014). Comparative analysis: On-site versus remote supervision for APE preservice teachers. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 85(S1), 140–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, K., & Kientz, M. (2013). A model for successful use of student response systems. Nursing Education Perspectives, 34(5), 334–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knauf, H. (2016). Reading, listening and feeling: Audio feedback as a component of an inclusive learning culture at universities. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 442–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1021664.

  • Lee, C., Cheung, W. K. W., Wong, K. C. K., & Lee, F. S. L. (2013). Immediate web-based essay critiquing system feedback and teacher follow-up feedback on young second language learners’ writings: An experimental study in a Hong Kong secondary school. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(1), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2011.630672.

  • Lee, L., & Markey, A. (2014). A study of learners’ perceptions of online intercultural exchange through web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 26(3), 281–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeFebvre, L., LeFebvre, L., Blackburn, K., & Boyd, R. (2015). Student estimates of public speaking competency: The meaning extraction helper and video self-evaluation. Communication Education, 64(3), 261–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leibold, N., & Schwarz, L. M. (2015). The art of giving online feedback. Journal of Effective Teaching, 15(1), 34–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, J., & De Luca, R. (2014). Review of assessment feedback. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 378–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2012.709494.

  • Link, S., Dursun, A., Karakaya, K., & Hegelheimer, V. (2014). Towards better ESL practices for implementing automated writing evaluation. CALICO Journal, 31(3), 323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malouff, J. M., & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2016). Bias in grading: A meta-analysis of experimental research findings. Australian Journal of Education, 60(3), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944116664618.

  • Marden, N. Y., Ulman, L. G., Wilson, F. S., & Velan, G. M. (2013). Online feedback assessments in physiology: Effects on students’ learning experiences and outcomes. Advances in Physiology Education, 37(2), 192–200. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00092.2012.

  • 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.

  • Mauri, T., Ginesta, A., & Rochera, M.-J. (2014). The use of feedback systems to improve collaborative text writing: A proposal for the higher education context. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(4), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2014.961503.

  • McCarthy, J. (2015). Evaluating written, audio and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 153–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. (2016). Global learning partnerships in the Café: Peer feedback as a formative assessment tool for animation students. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(6), 1298–1318. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.994532.

  • Moore, C., & Wallace, I. P. H. (2012). Personalizing feedback for feed-forward opportunities utilizing audio feedback technologies for online students. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 2(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJEEEE.2012.V2.72.

  • Morris, C., & Chikwa, G. (2016). Audio versus written feedback: Exploring learners’ preference and the impact of feedback format on students’ academic performance. Active Learning in Higher Education, 17, 125–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munro, W., & Hollingworth, L. (2014). Audio feedback to physiotherapy students for viva voce: How effective is ‘the living voice’? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 865–878. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.873387.

  • Novakovich, J. (2016). Fostering critical thinking and reflection through blog-mediated peer feedback. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(1), 16–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Loughlin, J., Ní Chróinín, D., & O’Grady, D. (2013). Digital video: The impact on Children’s learning experiences in primary physical education. European Physical Education Review, 19(2), 165–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlando, J. (2016). A comparison of text, voice, and screencasting feedback to online students. American Journal of Distance Education, 30(3), 156–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2016.1187472.

  • Parkin, H. J., Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., & Thorpe, L. (2012). A role for technology in enhancing students’ engagement with feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(8), 963–973. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2011.592934.

  • Penning de Vries, B., Cucchiarini, C., Bodnar, S., Strik, H., & van Hout, R. (2015). Spoken grammar practice and feedback in an ASR-based CALL system. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(6), 550–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plant, J. L., Corden, M., Mourad, M., O’Brien, B. C., & van Schaik, S. M. (2013). Understanding self-assessment as an informed process: Residents’ use of external information for self-assessment of performance in simulated resuscitations. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 18(2), 181–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Portolese Dias, L., & Trumpy, R. (2014). Online Instructor’s use of audio feedback to increase social presence and student satisfaction. Journal of Educators Online, 11(2), 19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranalli, J., Link, S., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2017). Automated writing evaluation for formative assessment of second language writing: Investigating the accuracy and usefulness of feedback as part of argument-based validation. Educational Psychology, 37(1), 8–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1136407.

  • Rock, M., Gregg, M., Gable, R., Zigmond, N., Blanks, B., Howard, P., & Bullock, L. (2012). Time after time online: An extended study of virtual coaching during distant clinical practice. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 20(3), 277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rott, S., & Weber, E. D. (2013). Preparing students to use wiki software as a collaborative learning tool. CALICO Journal, 30(2), 179–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sancho-Vinuesa, T., Escudero-Viladoms, N., & Masià, R. (2013). Continuous activity with immediate feedback: A good strategy to guarantee student engagement with the course. Open Learning, 28(1), 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sancho-Vinuesa, T., & Viladoms, N. E. (2012). A proposal for formative assessment with automatic feedback on an online mathematics subject. RUSC, 9(2), 240–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sopina, E., & McNeill, R. (2015). Investigating the relationship between quality, format and delivery of feedback for written assignments in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(5), 666–680. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.945072.

  • Steif, P. S., Fu, L., & Kara, L. B. (2016). Providing formative assessment to students solving multipath engineering problems with complex arrangements of interacting parts: An intelligent tutor approach. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(8), 1864–1880. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1057745.

  • Strobl, C. (2014). Affordances of web 2.0 Technologies for Collaborative Advanced Writing in a foreign language. CALICO Journal, 31(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, W., & West, J. (2013). Assessment for “digital first language” speakers: Online video assessment and feedback in higher education. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 25(3), 288–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Popta, E., Kral, M., Camp, G., Martens, R. L., & Simons, P. R.-J. (2017). Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider. Educational Research Review, 20, 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.10.003.

  • Voelkel, S., & Bennett, D. (2014). New uses for a familiar technology: Introducing mobile phone polling in large classes. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(1), 46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y. H., & Young, S. C. S. (2015). Effectiveness of feedback for enhancing English pronunciation in an ASR-based CALL system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(6), 493–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D., Dummer, P., Hawthorne, K., Cousins, J., Emmett, C., & Johnson, M. (2014). Healthcare students’ perceptions of electronic feedback through GradeMark®. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 27–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, J., & Turner, W. (2016). Enhancing the assessment experience: Improving student perceptions, engagement and understanding using online video feedback. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(4), 400–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittler, M., Hartman, N., Manthey, D., Hiestand, B., & Askew, K. (2016). Video-augmented feedback for procedural performance. Medical Teacher, 38(6), 607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woo, M. M., Chu, S. K. W., & Li, X. (2013). Peer-feedback and revision process in a wiki mediated collaborative writing. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(2), 279–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, W.-C. V., Petit, E., & Chen, C.-H. (2015). EFL writing revision with blind expert and peer review using a CMC open forum. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 58–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xianwei, G., Samuel, M., & Asmawi, A. (2016). Qzone weblog for critical peer feedback to improve business English writing: A case of Chinese undergraduates. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET, 15(3), 131–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, H. (2016). A web-based environment for facilitating reflective self assessment of choral conducting students. Contributions to Music Education, 41, 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, B., Lawrence, J., Warschauer, M., & Lin, C.-H. (2014). Middle school students’ writing and feedback in a cloud-based classroom environment. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 20(2), 201–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-014-9239-z.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Research in Assessment and Digital Learning, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia

    Phillip Dawson, Paige Mahoney & David Boud

  2. Faculty of Education, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Michael Henderson, Tracii Ryan & Michael Phillips

  3. Department of Medical Education, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Elizabeth Molloy

Authors
  1. Phillip Dawson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Henderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tracii Ryan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paige Mahoney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. David Boud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Michael Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Elizabeth Molloy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phillip Dawson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Info, Ste G150, Univ of North Texas, Denton, Texas, USA

    Michael J Spector

  2. School of Education, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA

    Barbara B Lockee

  3. School of Education, Baker University, Overland Park, Kansas, USA

    Marcus D. Childress

Section Editor information

  1. Learning, Design and Technology, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany

    Dirk Ifenthaler

  2. Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia

    Dirk Ifenthaler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Dawson, P. et al. (2018). Technology and Feedback Design. In: Spector, M., Lockee, B., Childress, M. (eds) Learning, Design, and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_124-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_124-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17727-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17727-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation