Conventional written feedback practices have a number of limitations, with research indicating many students place little value on feedback and may not even read them (Henderson & Phillips, 2015). At Deakin University, as with many universities, student evaluations consistently rank feedback as one of the lowest items. However, individual video-based feedback has a strong educative value as it prompts consideration and improvement of future work (Henderson & Phillips, 2015). Also, in research on written, audio and video feedback, the most positively received by students was video feedback, with the principal advantage being the clarity of the feedback provided (McCarthy, 2015).
For this reason a model of feedback was developed based on the four conditions required for optimal feedback as identified by Boud (2015) of 1) valuing the input, 2) appreciation of the criteria and standards, 3) trust between the giver and receiver and 4) developing students’ capacity to calibrate their own judgements and appreciate the qualities of their work and how it might be improved.
This project involved the provision of individual video-based feedback to 4th year Honours students (N=65) on a major written assessment task on the topic of research culture and ethics in a Research Methods unit. The videos were ∼3 minutes duration and combined a screencast of the marker going through the student’s work, with a smaller talking head video of the marker embedded within it. The elements of the video feedback provided were adapted from the model developed by Henderson & Phillips (2015). The feedback screencasts were intended to help students visually focus on the specific strengths and key aspects of their work to improve in relation to the assessment criteria, and also provides feedback on their self-evaluation to enhance their evaluative judgement (Boud, Lawson & Thompson, 2013). Students were then surveyed regarding their experiences and perceptions of video feedback.
There are several lines of evidence that indicate this video-based feedback enhanced student engagement with the feedback process and hence their learning from it. Firstly, student evaluation survey scores of 92% agreement was much higher for the feedback item than the previous three year average (78%) and also higher than the current 75-79% average for School, Faculty and University. Secondly, data indicated high agreement with items: trust in the marker (89%), motivation and confidence to improve (76%), understanding of the quality of their work (78%), and enhanced learning (68%). These data were consistent with student comments such as “I liked the video feedback as sometimes written feedback can be misconstrued… the intonation gave a better indication of how I actually went”.
In summary, video-based feedback appears a promising alternative to the traditional written form and enhances student engagement with the feedback process. Further research is now required to examine its effect on student learning.
Boud D. (2015) Feedback: ensuring that it leads to enhanced learning, The Clinical Teacher, 12: 3–7.
Boud D, Lawson R, Thompson DG. (2013) Does student engagement in self-assessment calibrate their judgement over time? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38:, 941-956.
Henderson M, Phillips M. (2015) Video-based feedback on student assessment: scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1): 51-66.
McCarthy J. (2015) Evaluating written, audio and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2): 153-169.