A qualitative synthesis of video feedback in higher education

Abstract

While written and audio feedback have been well-examined by researchers, video feedback has received less attention. This review establishes the current state of research into video feedback encompassing three formats: talking head, screencast and combination screencast. Existing research shows that video feedback has a high level of acceptability amongst both staff and students and may help strengthen student-marker relationships; however, the impact of video feedback on student learning outcomes is yet to be determined. In addition, current evidence is drawn largely from small-scale studies and self-reported data susceptible to the novelty effect. While video feedback appears to be a promising alternative to traditional written feedback for its relative relational richness, the medium continues to be primarily used for information transmission rather than dialogue. Further research is needed to establish how the medium of video influences the feedback process, its potential to facilitate dialogue and its effects on student learning.

Does the type of feedback channel used in online learning environments matter? Students’ perceptions and impact on learning

“…This preference for video for establishing greater dialogue and interaction between students and lecturers could be linked, to a certain extent, to how familiar students were with interacting with others face-to-face. Our results could be complemented with the findings by Mahoney et al (2019), who note that the use of video feedback does not necessarily entail the establishment of a dialogic process requiring students to engage with feedback. For this engagement to happen, improvements to feedback design are required.…”

“…In terms of creating closeness between students and lecturers, the review by Mahoney et al (2019) acknowledges that video can provide a response to this and it may foster social presence within what is known as a community of inquiry (Garrison et al, 2000). The human voice has a strong influence upon perceived social presence (Garrison et al, 2000).…”

“…A review on the use of video feedback in higher education highlighted the lack of studies that focus on the impact of this feedback channel on student learning and performance (Mahoney et al, 2019). The most interesting idea raised was that the use of video feedback does not necessarily entail the establishment of a dialogic process requiring students to engage with the feedback.…”

Developing a learning-centred framework for feedback literacy

“…Various routes to explain and explore these phenomena have been taken. These include a focus on improving the nature of comments provided to students (Hattie and Timperley 2007;Dunworth and Sanchez 2016), a focus on the mode of delivery of feedback information (Bennett et al 2017;Ryan, Henderson, and Phillips 2019;Mahoney, Macfarlane, and Ajjawi 2019), and an emphasis on feedback dialogue between students and educators (Carless 2006;McLean, Bond, and Nicholson 2015;Winstone et al 2017). In particular, there has been a shift away from an exclusive focus on what teachers do to initiate feedback (inputs), to what students do and how they might be more actively involved in feedback processes (Boud and Molloy 2013).…”

Developing Language and Intercultural Skills through an IaH Programme at University

“…Students consider that the video format affords a clearer understanding of marker comments and helps avoid misinterpretations, with the visual and aural cues communicated in video significantly improving clarity and detail and reducing the ambiguity of feedback information. (Mahoney et al 2019, 164) The novelty of the idea must also be taken into consideration and it may be that if students were always receiving feedback via SCT videos they may feel very different (Mahoney et al 2019).…”