Presentation to TLt 2010 held April 26-28 in Saskatoon, SK . The session discusses research findings re audio feedback provided by faculty to students in their course work.
3. Background Project sponsored by Campus Saskatchewan and SIAST Involves Practical Nursing & Perioperative Nursing Programs & Faculty Certificate Program students and faculty 8 faculty respondents (all) 6 student respondents – 4 FCP, 2 Practical Nursing Program Uses Adobe Acrobat 9 Professional Extended to embed audio and text comments in pdf converted individual student course work and limited discussion postings Instruments involved web survey and focus group
5. General Research Findings No clear preference for written or audio feedback—valuable in combination More time required to listen and/or provide audio comments Perceived that audio comments were more personal than text based comments Student populations differ (undergraduate/professional faculty/graduate) – seems to be more valued by higher educated Quality of audio dependent on various factors: audio settings and equipment (e.g., Dynex headset)
6. Research Findings - Students Overall Positive Comments “I liked the audio because this instructor said more than ‘good job’.” “This is my first experience with audio feedback and I think it is AWESOME. The insertion of text is also beneficial.” “Certainly tone of voice and inflection help to distinguish intended meaning more accurately than written text.” “Listening to feedback as you went through a paper was very helpful, almost like a one on one with the instructor to hear their thoughts as they progressed through reading the paper.” “more personal, negative comments seen as more constructive. Increased perception of teacher engagement.” “option was easy to access”
7. Research Findings - Students Negative feedback “It seemed the instructor was trying to sound neutral in the audio feedback which left a feeling of apathy.” “The auditory feedback didn’t always work; couldn’t rely on it as a resource.” “Audio feedback was annoying, a true conversation or written comments would be better.”
9. Research Findings - Faculty Affords elaboration of instructor comments (used for summation and/or specific feedback) Personalizes feedback (expression, inflection, humour) Easier to express oneself than formalized written comments (“feel freer to expand on comments”) Technical glitches when starting (audio setup; eliminate background noise) More valuable with complex assignments, research papers, critiques large than small class size All faculty would recommend use of audio commenting to other faculty
10. Commenting Example Example of Student Paper Example of Student Paper with Audio and Text-based commenting
11. Specific Techniques Upfront note to students to contact faculty if difficulty in accessing audio Provide summations, specific details, examples Enhance audio with use of stamps, highlighting, post-it notes... Placing mark in audio comment to ensure students listen to feedback Summary & weaving of discussion posts Refer students to other students for particular help (e.g., APA format)
12. Recommendations Provide portal of resources and have a resource person for inquiries/support Investigate further use in discussions and group work to evaluate impact on social presence Investigate LMS which supports user-friendly audio embed Investigate further use by/purchase of software for interested faculty (e.g., FCP) Increase awareness of research and findings within SIAST Educate others re specific techniques Investigate options for student use
13. Future Possibilities Provide overall comments to entire class Introduce audio commenting in “Online Learning Made Easy” orientation course for students Exploit use of Adobe Acrobat 9 Professional extended Automatic conversion of audio comments to text for print
14. Resources PPT presentation posted on Slideshare http://www.slideshare.net/nelsond denise.nelson@siast.sk.ca sharon.misfeldt@siast.sk.ca