Running head: EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 1

Effective Feedback in Online and Blended Environments

Megan Coffey

Diego Mureno

Shannon Stone

David Temple

Lenoir-Rhyne University

EDU 655: Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Online Environments

7 December 2016

Effective Feedback in Online and Blended Environments

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 2

Through the years, learning has transitioned from the traditional brick-and-mortar

pedagogy to an online environment, with other elements of teaching following suit. One of the

most pivotal of those elements is providing feedback to students. Whether addressing student

feedback in online or traditional face-to-face settings, researchers in teaching and learning, while

acknowledging the central role of feedback, differ in the approaches that they advocate. Still,

some general trends have emerged.

Feedback is an opportunity for teachers to not only assess a student's work, but also to

help students learn from both their strengths and weaknesses as it relates to the task at hand.

Specific and directive feedback explaining to students how they can make their work stronger

and where they went wrong is vital in the learning process. The research also supports that

feedback has to be timely (Kearns, 2012). Good teachers elicit feedback consistently and

frequently throughout the duration of the class (Pyke & Sherlock, 2010).

Feedback can take on many forms, but the purpose remains steadfast: help students grow,

reflect, and improve. According to Dylan William (2016), feedback should develop a student's

"critical eye." that allows them to eventually design and achieve learning without the instructors

supervision.

Feedback alone is not enough according to many researchers. Simply indicating that an

answer or an insight is right or wrong does not further learning. Our students want more;

indeed, they deserve more. Assessment all by itself, write Carol Geary Schneider and Lee

Shulman (2007), is an insufficient condition for powerful learning and improvement. It is not

the assessment itself that that makes the difference, they argue, but rather to what ends the

insights gained from the assessment are used. Teachers must consider the purpose of the

feedback in its design and implementation.

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 3

Feedback, when constructed effectively, can become its own form of instruction. As

Kulhavy suggests, feedback "takes on the forms of new instruction, rather than informing the

student solely about correctness (Kulhavy, as cited in Chaqmaqchee, 2015). Feedback should

help the student to improve the quality of work rather than just a tallying of mistakes. As in the

workplace, an employee can learn from mistakes and constructive feedback to work more

efficiently. This view of feedback relates to the need for instructor presence that students have

repeatedly called for in research studies (Ice, P., Curtis, R., Phillips, P., & Wells, J. (2007);

Gallien, T. & Oomen-Early, J. (2008); Pyke, J. & Sherlock, J. (2010).

In fact, a sense of presence is considered an important component of any online

environment in that it can remove the sense of perceived isolation or transactional distance

(Moore, 1991). This presence, as illustrated by Irma Sandercock (2016), integrates a number of

the critical aspects of student learning. As shown in the illustration, presence can facilitate

student interactions with each other and the instructor, closer interaction with the goals and

directions of learning, and an opportunity for the instructor to establish a more desirable climate

and pace of learning.

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 4

rma Sandercock (2016)

Alternatives to Written Feedback

The most traditional way of providing feedback in an educational setting is through

written text. The difficulty with written feedback is that it can sometimes be interpreted

differently than intended. Swan Dagen, Matter, Rinehart, and Ice (2008) found that feedback was

richer in audio format, with more adjectives used in audio than in written commentary; also,

students perceived they had received more feedback when given audio commentary than in

written commentary; and instructors perceived they had given more detailed feedback in audio

commentary than in written commentary. In a case study, performed by Philip Ice, Reagan

Curtis, Perry Phillips, and John Wells (2007), students over the course of one semester received a

mixture of asynchronous audio and text-based feedback. Findings of the study revealed

extremely high student satisfaction with embedded asynchronous audio feedback as compared to

asynchronous text only feedback. Audio feedback was associated with conveying nuance,

feelings of increased involvement and enhanced learning community interactions, increased

retention of content; and with a perception that the instructor cared more about the student

(Philip Ice, Reagan Curtis, Perry Phillips, & John Wells (2007). Their study revealed an

overwhelming student preference for asynchronous audio feedback as compared to traditional

text based feedback,with no negative perceptions of the technique. The fact that over one third of

students cited the use of audio feedback as a key factor they would use in selecting future online

courses is significant. When these findings are combined with data comparing the use of

knowledge constructed using audio feedback and the level at which that knowledge was applied,
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 5

we believe asynchronous audio commenting merits serious consideration in the development and

delivery of future courses (19).

In a 2014 study Andrew Cavanaugh and Liyan Song also considered instructor and

student perspectives on audio versus written feedback. The study examined student perceptions

of these two types of feedback in the areas of grammar, organization, and content as well as

general, overall impressions of the two (Cavanaugh and Song, 2014). The results were that

students tended to prefer written feedback for more specific, detail-laden assignments such as

locating mistakes in papers and correcting them (Cavanaugh and Song, 2014).

In essence, feedback aims to enhance teaching and learning through the verbal and

written expertise from the instructor. Students are able to use the feedback to either remediate or

enrich their content knowledge. If used correctly, feedback can increase student learning and

efficacy. Feedback is a powerful tool a teacher can use for engagement, teaching, and learning in

any context.

Despite the possibilities that effective online feedback holds for improving learning, it is

clear that instructors have concerns about student assessment in the online environment, writes

Lorna Kearns. They worry about monitoring their students progress and understanding and

providing actionable feedback (Kearns, 2012). Our study attempts to explore how these worries

can be addressed and how students feel about the options that are being used in area classrooms.

How can teachers improve feedback?

According to Wilson and Stacy in the Australian Journal of Education and Technology, it

is critical to develop "the importance of interaction in the online teaching environments" and "the

role of staff development in developing teacher presence online." This supports the notion that

teachers need to be trained on how to develop a presence online. Teachers with little to no
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 6

experience in online teaching need support and a skill set unique to the venue. Trial by fire or

trial and error are not the best idea for the teacher or the student. The teacher would be practicing

on students who are in the class to learn.

The same study argues the importance of interaction online. Students and teachers must

engage with the coursework, but perhaps even more importantly, with each other. That

interaction and learning from each other is vital to students being successful in an online class.

The use of rubrics is another way for teachers to improve their feedback effectiveness in

any class, but especially online with less face-to-face instruction. Researchers Lipnevich,

Mccallen, Miles, Pace and Smith examined efficient modes for providing standardized feedback

to improve performance on an assignment for an English class involving writing a brief research

proposal. Two forms of standardized feedback (detailed rubric and proposal exemplars) were

utilized is an experimental design with undergraduate students at three urban college campuses.

Students completed a draft of a proposal as part of their course requirements and were then

randomly assigned to receive a detailed rubric, proposal exemplars, or a rubric and proposal

exemplars for use in revising their work.

Analyses of students' writing from first draft to second draft indicated that all three

conditions led to improvements in writing that were significant and strong in terms of effect size,

with the stand-alone detailed rubric leading to the greatest improvement. Follow-up focus groups

with students indicated that a stand-alone rubric potentially engages greater mindfulness on the

part of the student.

This implies that providing students with a clear understanding of what the expectations

are for any assignment is beneficial. Rubrics are a good use of time to make sure students know
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 7

in advance how they will be assessed or evaluated. Examples or models of the expectation are

also beneficial. The more detailed the rubric, the better in this study.

The words timely and meaningful complete a teachers online feedback toolbox. In a

two-year study exploring the design and implementation cycle of online activities as an integral

part of a distance language course, authors Hampel and Pleines (2013) explore the online

environment. When the course they studied was introduced in 2009, activities had been designed

on the basis of second language acquisition principles as well as sociocultural theories, providing

a basis for student interaction and taking into account the affordances of the environment, a

Moodle-based VLE. After the end of the first year an evaluation was carried out that examined

quantitative and qualitative data (Moodle user logs, learner survey and learner interviews).

It was found that students preferred forums to other tools and that assessment-related

activities attracted higher participation rates than other tasks. It also highlighted a number of

issues, including low participation in on-task discussions, a large gap between viewings and

contributions, very large differences in individual engagement, low priority given to the online

activities by some students, and varying levels of e-literacy amongst learners. Consequently,

activities were re-designed and a number of changes were implemented in 2010 that included

more teacher involvement, fewer tasks, a simpler structure, and a reduced number of tools. A

comparison of learner participation across the two years shows that these changes had a positive

impact on learner engagement.

This study proves meaningful and timely feedback are essential to maintaining student

engagement. Open communication between instructor and students, and student to student are

also vital contributors to student success online. It also reaffirms that a student's e-literacy should

be considered by teachers when designing courses and activities online. Fewer, but more
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 8

meaningful tasks was more effective in this study than having more. Also, simple structure and

clear direction is valued by students in an online class.

Conclusion

Feedback and communication are vital to the success of any class. Without the visual and

in person cues of communication, these are even more important in an online class. Building

rubrics is something students can be a part of, and this can serve in helping them take ownership

of their learning and deepen the understanding of the feedback using the rubrics. As technology

grows, so must our teacher toolbox. We must evolve and grow while paying close attention to the

research so that we can be the best we can be at our craft. As online learning evolves, we must

evolve. Our feedback directly impacts student learning, and the responsibility of providing

meaningful and effective feedback must become as important as being content masters.

Methods

Participants

In this study, 78 teachers who teach grades 6-12 were surveyed with 54% teaching

exclusively online and 46% teaching in both an online and face-to face environment. Secondary

teachers (grades 9-12) made up 91% of those surveyed. The majority of the teachers surveyed

work with North Carolina Virtual Public Schools in the Occupational Course of Study Blended

Program. This program partners highly qualified online content teachers with a face-to face

highly qualified special education teacher who works with the students in the schools in North

Carolina. The two teachers work together in a co-teaching team for these OCS students with

asynchronous daily and weekly synchronous communication. There is a significant amount of

documentation required by both teachers. Twelve of the teachers surveyed work in an at-risk
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 9

program for Wake County Public Schools that is all virtual. Four of the those WCPSS teachers

work with both NCVPS and the at-risk program. The teachers reflect various ethnicities, but

more women than men. The education levels of all surveyed have a minimum of a Bachelors

Degree in education, and 60% have an advanced Masters Degree. All surveyed are licensed

North Carolina teachers in good standing with the State Board of Education.

As previously stated, the survey received 78 responses. Of those 78 responses, 100% of

teachers surveyed have at least 5 years of experience or more, and 65% of teachers have 11 or

more years of teaching experience. More than half of the teachers (53.8%) have classes that fall

into the 10 students or less range. The other participants class sizes range from 11-20 students

(21.8%, 17 participants), 20-30 students (21.8%, 12 participants), 31+ students (3.8%, 3

participants), and Other (9%, 7 participants). This likely influences the likelihood of the time for

feedback the teachers have due to the small class size, which could impact the survey responses.

One thing to note is the level of training provided in NCVPS is extensive. NCVPS has a

chief academic officer, four instructional directors, a curriculum director, two curriculum

coordinators, and an exceptional childrens director. They employ 600+ teachers, and within

those ranks they have instructional leaders and course leads. This structure leads to a highly

functioning and responsive curriculum and instruction team that is focused exclusively on

teaching and learning (ncvps.org) The training operates on 4 pillars: communication, teaching

through announcements, teaching through meaningful feedback, and individualized learning.

Training is provided for both programs on how to use CANVAS, learning management software

as the venue for classes. This training for both programs provides an additional toolbox for

teaching online that some teachers in other programs may not benefit from.
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 10

Each teacher surveyed did so voluntarily and anonymously, with no reward or incentive

given. One email request went out to the NCVPS OCS Blended and WCPSS SCORE Programs.

The Director of OCS Blended shared the email created by our group with the link to the survey

embedded. The WCPSS survey was sent out by a group member to her colleagues. Both of

these surveys were approved by the program directors.

Data Collection

The survey consisted of 20 questions, with 17 drop down choice and 3 short answer

questions. The survey can be viewed by visiting the following link:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdnkIZlOjGElCtkkb4fldIPjLWj_oHHvj89z4RsJHxs

dxUkQg/viewform

The survey focused on teaching feedback in three forms: written, audio and video. The

goal of the survey was to learn what types of feedback teachers give students in an online

environment and why. The quality of the feedback was not studied. Additional questions

provided us with information on grades taught, years of experience, degrees earned, and average

class size to determine any factors that may influence the findings. We also wanted to determine

any obstacles that prevented or enabled certain types of feedback over others.

In creating this survey, we used the same wording for questions for all three types of

feedback (written, audio, and video) to eliminate any bias and to keep the survey fair. We also

provided the reasons we collaborated on to come up with as the most likely, but allowed for an

other box as well for those who had a different reason from our choices. By repeating the exact

language, each feedback type received the same evaluation. We shared this survey with Dr.

Linton and received some feedback on when to make a question mandatory and when to leave it

optional to further support having an objective and fair survey. The survey was also anonymous
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 11

so that teachers would feel comfortable sharing genuine reasons as to why they may or may not

use certain types of feedback.

Once we came up with the questions and group members signed off on the collaborative

document, we used Google Forms to create the 20 question survey. The group and previewed

the survey before sending to the directors for approval. Once approved, the directors asked for

an email with directions and purpose to go with the link (see Appendix).

It took a couple of weeks to get the survey approved with NCVPS, so by the time it went

out, we only had about 10 days to collect data. The responses trickled in, and we peaked at 78

teachers submitting the survey. Once the data was collected, we looked for trends and surprises

in the results.

Data Analysis

The survey sent to the 78 participants was given through Google Forms. The data for this

study was analyzed using charts and statistics provided by the results of the Google Form. All

participants responses were charted using circle graph and bar graphs. The data were scrutinized

individually. Percentages and count were considered as important factors for each response. The

responses for the open-ended questions were analyzed individually. However, not all participants

chose to answer the open-ended questions.

Findings

Written Feedback

All participants of the study responded affirmative that they have given students written

feedback (see Figure 1). Sixty-five participants (68.8%) stated that written feedback is provided

often to students. Nine participants (11.8%) stated that this type of feedback is sometime

provided, while the remaining four participants were split in half between Rarely and Other,
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 12

both 2.6%. The reasons for providing written feedback vary. Most of the participants (74%) state

that written feedback is provided to students because it is efficient. It is easy to use received

the next most responses from participants (51.9%, 40 participants). Other reasons for using

written feedback include: It takes less time than other types of feedback (29.9%, 23

participants), My school requires it (36.4%, 28 participants), My students prefer it (6.5.%, 5

participants), and Other (3.9%, 3 participants).

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 13

Figure 1.

Twenty-two responses were given for the question I dont provided my students with

written feedback because. The majority of responses (36.4%, 8 participants) stated that

written feedback is the least effective type of feedback. I prefer to use another method of
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 14

feedback and Other received the second most responses with 7 participants (31.8%) each (see

Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Audio Feedback

Audio feedback is the next widely used type of feedback among the participants of this

study. Sixty-nine (88.5%) of the participants stated that audio feedback was given to students.

10.3% responded that audio feedback was not given to students, while 1 participants (1.3%)

stated he/she were unsure. Of those that responded in the affirmative, 17 (21.8%) use audio

feedback often. In comparison, 42 participants (53.8%) have used this type of feedback

sometimes.

Sixty-nine participants responded to the question I provide students with audio feedback

because . . . (see Figure 3). In comparing the responses, I think it is effective received the

most affirmations with 58 (84.1.%) responses. It is easy to use received the next most with 28

(40.6%) responses. Thirteen (18.8%) participants noted that this type of feedback takes less time,
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 15

while 11 (15.9%) stated that students prefer this type of feedback. The least amount of responses

came from the choices Other with 9 (13%) and My school requires it with 4 (5.8%)

responses, respectively.

Figure 3.

Thirty-three participants responded to the I dont provide my students with audio

feedback because . . . (see Figure 4). Thirteen (39.4%) responded that he/she prefer to use

another form of feedback. 10 (30.3%) responses concluded that it takes too much time. Eight

(24.4.%) do not like to use this type of feedback. Three of the reasons received the same amount

of responses with 5 each (15.2%), those include: It is less effective than other types of

feedback, I need more training to feel comfortable enough to use it, and Other. Only 1 (3%)

participant responses he/she does not know how to provide this type of feedback.
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 16

Figure 4.

Video Feedback

In comparing the three types of feedback surveyed in this study, participants responded

video feeback was the type of feedback least used (see Figure 5). 51 (65.4%) stated that he/she

have provided students with video feedback. 26 responses (33.3%) stated that he/she have not

provided video feedback to students. 35 (44.9%) responded that he/she have Rarely used video

feedback. 21 (26.9%) responses indicated that video feedback was Sometimes used. Only 15

(19.2%) responses were affirmative that video feedback is Often used. 7 (9%) participants

chose Other as he/her response.

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 17

Figure 5.

Fifty-four and 45 participants responded to the question regarding reasons for using or

not using video feedback, respectively (see Figure 6 and Figure 7). Forty-four responses (81.5%)

indicated that video feedback is used because he/she thinks it is effective. Seventeen responses

(31.5%) stated that students prefer this type of feedback. Thirteen (24.1%) determined this type

of feedback was easy to use. The least amount of responses were It takes less time with 6

(11.1%) and My school requires it and Other with 5 (9.3%) responses each. Twenty-one

(46.7%) participants of the survey agree that video feedback takes too much time. Other major

reasons for not using video feedback are preferring to use other forms of feedback with17

(37.8%) responses and not liking this type of feedback with 14 (31.1%). Four other responses all
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 18

received 2 (4.4.%) affirmations each.

Figure 6.
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 19

Figure 7.

Open-ended Responses

There were three open-ended responses in the survey. The first question asked

participants opinion on the most effective type of feedback. Video feedback received the most

responses with 25. Audio followed suit with 24 responses, and written feedback had 15

responses. Five participants stated that a combination of multiple types of feedback was the most

valuable (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Most Valuable Type of Feedback

_____________ is the most valuable feedback for my students because ____________.

Code Frequency Exemplar Data

Video 25 Video is the most valuable feedback for my students

because they are struggling readers and the images and
audio help them understand.

Audio 24 Audio because many students have extremely low

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 20

reading levels and it can be difficult for them to

comprehend a lot of writing. Also, it helps those who are
visual/auditory learners.

Written 15 It allows for clear, concise details which the student can
easily review.

Combination of 5 It appeals to different learning styles.

feedback types

Twenty-four participants responded that time was the biggest hurdle, or challenge, in

providing feedback to students. One participant stated that in a class of 30 students it is difficult

to reach everyone. Fifteen other participants stated that student participation was another big

challenge in providing feedback. That is, teacher taking time to give feedback and student also

taking time to read, listen, or watch the feedback (see Table 2) .

Table 2.

Biggest Challenge in Giving Effective Feedback

The biggest hurdle for providing feedback for my students is . . .

Code Frequency Exemplar Data

Time 24 Finding time to do individual audio and video feedback

is very time consuming.

Student 15 Often my students are not concerned with feedback . . .

Participation when students are concerned with personal success, they
are more apt to get the feedback and learn from it.

Discussion

The trends in the data were not really surprising. The research group predicted that

written feedback would be the most widely used, audio would be the second most used type, and
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 21

video feedback would be the type least used. The data trended exactly the research group

thought it would. The biggest surprises were in the why. The research group thought lack of

training would be the most likely reason behind not using audio or video feedback, but with

audio feedback, the teachers said they did not feel those were most effective. With video

feedback, the main reasons was needing more time and more training.

The biggest takeaways were that teachers need smaller classes, more time, and additional

training to really use audio and video feedback. Teachers expressed time as being the top

obstacle for why he/she do not provide more and varied feedback. Smaller class sizes would

help the time needed for more effective and varied feedback.

It is important to note that even though participants stated that they rarely use video

feedback, it received the most responses in the open-ended question. This implies that teachers

acknowledge the value of video feedback for students, yet lack the time and training to provide

effective video feedback. Also, the research group had not previously considered the role of the

student. The participants stated that feedback is meaningless without consideration of the

student. One participant stated:

Feedback is a tricky thing. If students dont look at it, it is useless. It is better to have pre-

made immediate feedback in most cases, especially in math, so students can see right

there where they went wrong.

Teachers in this study may have interpreted the questions to reflect the usage of feedback by

students. The research group had not previously considered this, but it is a valid point.

As stated previously, feedback can enhance the educational experience for students. The

results of this study lend themselves to previous research that suggests feedback is valued by

teachers and students. Research also suggests that written feedback is the most effective, and
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 22

participants of this study agreed. Audio feedback follows suit, just like in previous research.

Again, the results of this study did not sway from previous research.

Limitations

Limitations of this study include the lack of variety in participants. Most of the responses

came from participants from a similar area with similar demographics. It would be interesting to

note the difference in results from a different set of teachers and students. Also, the research

group did not take into account the subject area of the teacher. The group previously discussed

whether this question was necessary, ultimately it was decided to omit the question. However, in

looking at the results, it appears different subject areas use different type of feedback.
EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 23

Appendix

Email to Survey Participants

Greetings NCVPS colleagues. :) I am currently in graduate school for a Masters in Online

Teaching and Instructional Design. As one of our projects, we have to collect data on teacher

feedback. With so little high school teachers using online classes exclusively, it is tough to get

data. Please take the time to fill out this short survey so our group can provide real data to help

improve the direction of training in teacher feedback.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdnkIZlOjGElCtkkb4fldIPjLWj_oHHvj89z4RsJHxs

dxUkQg/viewform

If you have any questions, please let me know.

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 24

References

Eisener, E. (1991). The enlightened eye. New York: McMillan.

Gallien, T. & Oomen-Early, J. (2008). Personalized Versus Collective Instructor

Feedback in the Online Courseroom: Does Type of Feedback Affect Student Satisfaction,

Academic Performance and Perceived Connectedness With the Instructor?. International

Journal on E-Learning, 7(3), 463-476.

Hampel, R., & Pleines, C. (2013). Fostering student interaction and engagement in a

virtual learning environment: An investigation into activity design and implementation.

CALICO Journal, 30(3), 342-n/a. doi:http://0-

dx.doi.org.library.acaweb.org/10.11139/cj.30.3.342-370

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 Networks, 11(2), 3-25.

Kearns, L. (2012). Student assessment in online learning: Challenges and effective

practices. MERLOT Journal of Online Teaching and Learning, 8(3).

Lipnevich, A. A., Mccallen, L. N., Miles, K. P., & Smith, J. K. (2014). Mind the gap!

students' use of exemplars and detailed rubrics as formative assessment. Instructional

Science, 42(4), 539-559. doi:http://0-dx.doi.org.library.acaweb.org/10.1007/s11251-013-

9299-9

Meloni, C., Olesova, L., Richardson, J., & Weasenforth, D. (2011). Using asynchronous

instructional audio feedback in online environments: A mixed methods study. Journal of

Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1).

EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK IN ONLINE AND BLENDED 25

Moore, M.G. (1991). Editorial: Distance in education theory. The American Journal of

Distance Education, 5(3), 1-6.

Pyke, J. & Sherlock, J. (2010). A closer look at instructor-student feedback online: A case

study analysis of type and frequency. MERLOT Journal of Online Teaching, 6(1), 110-

121.

Sandercock, I. (2016). How important is instructor presence in an online course?

TeachOnline (Arizona State University). Retrieved from:

https://teachonline.asu.edu/2014/10/important-instructor-presence-online-course/

Schneider, C.G. & Shulman, L.S. (2007). Foreward. In R.J. Shavelson, A brief history of

student learning assessment: How we got where we are and a proposal for where to go

next. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Swan Dagen, Matter, C., Rinehart, S., & Ice, P. (2008). Can you hear me now? Providing

feedback using audio commenting technology. College Reading Association Yearbook,

29, 152-166.

Wiliam, D. (2016). The secret of effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 73(7). 10-

15.

Wilson, G., & Stacey, E. (2004). Online interaction impacts on learning: Teaching the

teachers to teach online. Australasian journal of educational technology, 20(1), 33-48.