International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology

The International Promotion Agency of Culture Technology (국제문화기술진흥원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Systematic Literature Review on Feedback Types for Continuous Learning Enhancement of Online Learners

  • Yoseph Park (Department of Visual Design, Hongik University)
  • Received : 2024.07.25
  • Accepted : 2024.09.05
  • Published : 2024.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study conducted a systematic literature review using online databases to investigate the effective feedback types that enhance the learning experiences of online students. Feedback is a critical component for learner success. With the expansion of online education, the importance of feedback has become more evident due to the reduced interaction between instructors and learners. Instructors must provide high-quality feedback that motivates learners and supports their educational goals. This involves using automated tools appropriate for the environment and effective feedback strategies to deliver personalized feedback. The literature was gathered through an extensive search process, adhering to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and included a risk assessment of selected studies, drawing from sources such as Google Scholar, Elsevier, and other Scopus-indexed journals. The review adhered to the guidelines set forth by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Specific keywords related to the study's focus, including "Online learning," "Improving learning," "Learner performance," "Feedback type," and "Feedback," guided the database searches. The protocol for selecting systematic reviews on learning enhancement involved screening articles published from 2013 to 2021 based on their titles and abstracts according to established criteria. Analyzing and studying data on learning patterns in non-face-to-face educational environments can improve learners' needs and educational effectiveness. Selecting the right types of feedback, taking into account the learners' levels and educational objectives, is crucial for providing effective feedback. A variety of feedback types are essential for the continuous improvement of learners' learning.

Keywords

References

  1. Lee, D. J., & Kim, M. S. (2020). The current state and improvement measures of university remote online education during COVID-19. Korea Association of Multimedia-Assisted Language 
  2. Ministry of Education. (2020, June). COVID-19 response: Online school opening in Korea and challenges for future education. Sejong: Ministry of Education. 
  3. Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S., & Healing, G. (2010). Net generation or digital natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? Computers in Education, 54, 722-732. 
  4. Sung, E., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). Five facets of social presence in online distance education. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1738-1747. 
  5. Ouadoud, M., Nejjari, A., Chkouri, M. Y., & El-Kadiri, K. E. (2017). Learning management system and the underlying learning theories. In Proceedings of the Mediterranean symposium on smart city applications (pp. 732-744). Springer. 
  6. Kim, H. J., Kim, E. Y., Lee, E. S., Gye, B. K., Lee, E. H., Kim, H. Y., Lee, G. Y., & Lee, B. G. (2017). Research on the establishment and operation of future schools. Korea Education and Research Information Service. 
  7. Ypsilandis, G. (2002). Feedback in distance education. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15, 167-181. 
  8. Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199-218. 
  9. Tseng, S.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49, 1161-1174. 
  10. Belcadhi, L. C. (2016). Personalized feedback for self assessment in lifelong learning environments based on semantic web. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 562-570. 
  11. Gulwani, S., Radicek, I., & Zuleger, F. (2014). Feedback generation for performance problems in introductory programming assignments. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering (pp. 41-51). ACM. 
  12. Marin, V. J., Pereira, T., Sridharan, S., & Rivero, C. R. (2017). Automated personalized feedback in introductory java programming moocs. In 2017 IEEE 33rd international conference on data engineering (ICDE) (pp. 1259-1270). IEEE. 
  13. Bates, A.W. (2001) Beyond button-pushing: using technology to improve learning, in R. Epper & A.W. Bates (Eds) Teaching Faculty How to Use Technology: best practices from leading institutions, 141-152. 
  14. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Re-search, 77(1), 81-112. 
  15. Boud, D., & Dawson, P. (2021). What feedback literate teachers do: an empirically-derived competency framework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1-14. 
  16. Lindkvist, K. (1981). Approaches to textual analysis. In K. E. Rosengren (Ed.), Advances in content analysis (pp. 23-41). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. 
  17. Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. Bristol, PA: Falmer. 
  18. Curtain, R. (2002). Online delivery in the vocational education and training sector. 
  19. Miller, A., Topper, A. M., Richardson, S., 2016. Suggestions for improving IPEDS distance education data collection. (NPEC 2017). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. 
  20. Moore et al. (2011). E-learning, online learning and distance learning environments: Are they the same?. The Internet and Higher Education, 14(2), 129135. 
  21. Spector, J. & de la Teja, I. (2001) Competencies for online teaching. Syracuse, NY; ERIC. 
  22. Lee, K. (2017). Rethinking the accessibility of online higher education: a historical review. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 15-23. 
  23. Ryan, S., Kaufman, J., Greenhouse, J., She, R., & Shi, J. (2016). The effectiveness of blended online learning courses at the Community College level. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 40(4), 285-298. 
  24. Singh, V., & Thurman, A. (2019). How many ways can we define online learning? A systematic literature review of definitions of online learning (1988-2018). American Journal of Distance Education, 33(4), 289-306. 
  25. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Re-search, 77(1), 81-112. 
  26. Cole, J. (2006). Toxic feedback: Helping writers survive and thrive. Hanover, NH: Uni-versity Press of New England. 
  27. Zsohar, H., & Smith, J. A. (2009). The power of "and" and "but" in constructive feed-back on clinical performance. Nurse Educator, 34(6), 241-243 
  28. Spink, A. (1997). Information science: A third feedback framework. Journal of the Amer-ican Society for Information Science (1986-1998), 48(8), 728. 
  29. Boud, D., & Dawson, P. (2021). What feedback literate teachers do: an empirically-derived competency framework. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1-14. 
  30. Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325. 
  31. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119-144. 
  32. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189. 
  33. Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325. 
  34. Noroozi, O., Biemans, H., & Mulder, M. (2016). Relations between scripted online peer feedback processes and quality of written argumentative essay. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 20-31. 
  35. Zacharias, N. T. (2007). Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. RELC Journal, 38(1), 38-52. 
  36. Noroozi, O., Banihashem, S. K., Taghizadeh Kerman, N., Parvaneh Akhteh Khaneh, M., Babayi, M., Ashrafi, H., & Biemans, H. (2022). Gender differences in students'argumentative essay writing, peer review performance and uptake in online learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-15. 
  37. Jaehnig, W., & Miller, M. L. (2007). Feedback types in programmed instruction: A systematic review. The psychological record, 57(2), 219-232. 
  38. Gilman,, D. A. (1969). Comparison of several feedback methods for correcting errors by computerassisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(6), 503-508. 
  39. Moore, J. W., & Smith, W. I. (1964). Role of knowledge of results in programmed instruction. Psychological Reports, 14, 407-423. 
  40. Roper, W. J. (1977). Feedback in computer assisted instruction. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 14(1), 43-49. 
  41. Rosa, E. M., & Leow, R. P. (2004). Computerized task-based exposure, explicitness, type of feedback, and Spanish L2 development. The Modern Language Journal, 88(2), 192-216. 
  42. McKendree, J. (1990). Effective feedback content for tutoring complex skills. Human-Computer Interaction, 5, 381-413. 
  43. Pridemore, D. R., & Klein, J. D. (1991). Control of feedback in computer- assisted instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(4), 27-32. 
  44. Roberts, F. C., & Park, O. (1984). Feedback strategies and cognitive style in computer-based instruction. Journal of Instructional Technology, 11(2), 63-74. 
  45. Rosa, E. M., & Leow, R. P. (2004). Computerized task-based exposure, explicitness, type of feedback, and Spanish L2 development. The Modern Language Journal, 88(2), 192-21. 
  46. Salas, S. B., & Dickinson, D. J. (1990). The effect of feedback and three different types of corrections on student learning. Journal of Human Behavior and Learning, 7(2), 13-19. 
  47. Waldrop, P. B., Justen, J. E., III, & ADAMS, T. M., II. (1986). A comparison of three types of feedback. Educational Technology, 26, 43-45. 
  48. Anderson, R. C., Kulhavy, R. W., & Andre, T. (1971). Feedback procedures in programmed instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 62(2), 148-156. 
  49. Clariana, R. B. (1990). A comparison of answer until correct feedback and knowledge of correct response feedback under two conditions of contextualization. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 17(4), 125-129 
  50. Clariana, R. B., Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (1991). The effects of different feedback strategies using computer-administered multiple-choice questions as instruction. Educational Technology, Research, and Development, 39(2), 5-17. 
  51. Grant, L., Mcavoy, R., & Keenan, J. B. (1982). Prompting and feedback variables in concept programming. Teaching of Psychology, 9(3), 173-177. 
  52. Gaynor, P. (1981). Effects of feedback delay on retention of computer-based instructional material. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 8(2), 28-34. 
  53. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Gopalakrishnan, M., & Casey, J. (1995). The effects of feedback and incentives on achievement in computer-based instruction. Comtemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 32-50. 
  54. Pysh, F., Blank, S. S., & Lambert, R. A. (1969). The effects of step size, response mode and knowledge of results upon achievement in programmed instruction. The Canadian Psychologist, 10(1), 49-64. 
  55. Holland, J. G. (1960). Teaching machines: An application of principles from the laboratory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 3, 275-287. 
  56. Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. New York: Appleton-Century- Crofts. 
  57. Rankin, R. J., & Trepper, T. (1978). Retention and delay of feedback in a computer-assisted instructional task. Journal of Experimental Education, 46(4), 67-70. 
  58. Sullivan, H. J., Schutz, R. E., & Baker, R. L. (1971). Effects of systematic variations in reinforcement contingencies on learner performance. American Educational Research Journal, 8, 135-142. 
  59. Crosbie, J., & Kelly, G. (1994). Effects of imposed postfeedback delays in programmed instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(3), 483-491. 
  60. Carvalho, C., Santos, J., Conboy, J., & Martins, D. (2014). Teachers' Feedback: Exploring Differences in Students' Perceptions. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, 169-173. 
  61. Fyfe, E. R., & Rittle-johnson, B. (2016). Feedback Both Helps and Hinders Learning: The Causal Role of Prior Knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 659. 
  62. Al-Bashir, M., Kabir, R., & Rahman, I. (2016). The value and effectiveness of feedback in improving students' learning and professionalizing teaching in higher education. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(16), 38-41. 
  63. Afzal, M., & Afzal, M. T. (2017). Teacher's Written Feedback and Students Achievement: An Exploration of Gender Differences Muhammad. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research and Practices in Education (ICRPE). Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad. 
  64. Shin Ji-young, Lee Young-geun, and Seoi (2017). The influence of feedback on student achievement goals: the interaction of comparative reference and regulatory focus. Learning and education, 49, 21-31. 
  65. Carver, M. (2017). Limitations of Corrective Feedforward: A Call for Resubmission Practices to become Learning-oriented. Journal of Academic Writing, 7(1) 1-15. 
  66. Henderson, M., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., Dawson, P., Molloy, E., & Mahoney, P. (2019). Conditions that enable effective feedback. Higher Education Research and Development, 38(7), 1401-1416. 
  67. Chalmers, C., Mowat, E., & Chapman, M. (2018). Marking and providing feedback face-to-face: Staff and student perspectives. Active Learning in Higher Education, 19(1), 35-45. 
  68. Lefroy, J., Watling, C., Teunissen, P. W., & Brand, P. (2015). Guidelines: the do's, don'ts and don't knows of feedback for clinical education. Perspectives on Medical Education, 4(6), 284-299. 
  69. Rossiter, J. A. (2016). Using an understanding of feedback processes to improve student learning. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(6), 57-62. 
  70. Omer, A., & Abdularhim, M. (2017). The criteria of constructive feedback: The feedback that counts. Journal of Health Specialties, 5(1), 45-48. 
  71. Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(1), 1-14. 
  72. Forsythe, A., & Johnson, S. (2017). Thanks, but No-Thanks for the Feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(6), 850-859. 
  73. Orsmond, P., & Merry, S. (2011). Feedback alignment: Effective and ineffective links between tutors' and students' understanding of coursework feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(2), 125-136. 
  74. Alderman, L., Towers, S., Bannah, S., & Phan, L. H. (2014). Reframing Evaluation of Learning and Teaching: An Approach to Change. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 14(1), 24-34. 
  75. Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70-120. 
  76. Ahmad, I., Saeed, M., & Salam, M. (2013). Effects of Corrective Feedback on Academic Achievements of Students: Case of Government Secondary Schools in Pakistan. International Journal of Science and Research, 2(1), 2319-7064. 
  77. Nunez-Pena, M.., Bono, R., & Suarez-Pellicioni, M. (2015). Feedback on Students' Performance: A Possible Way of Reducing The Negative Effect of Math Anxiety In Higher Education. International Journal of Educational Research, 53(9), 1689-1699. 
  78. Al-Bashir, M., Kabir, R., & Rahman, I. (2016). The value and effectiveness of feedback in improving students' learning and professionalizing teaching in higher education. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(16), 38-41. 
  79. Masantiah, C., Pasiphol, S., & Tangdhanakanond, K. (2020). Student and feedback: Which type of feedback is preferable? Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 41(2), 269-274. 
  80. Murtagh, L. (2014). The motivational paradox of feedback: Teacher and student perceptions. The Curriculum Journal, 25(4), 516-541. 
  81. Carvalho, C., Santos, J., Conboy, J., & Martins, D. (2014). Teachers' Feedback: Exploring Differences in Students' Perceptions. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, 169-173. 
  82. Afzal, M., & Afzal, M. T. (2017). Teacher's Written Feedback and Students Achievement: An Exploration of Gender Differences Muhammad. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research and Practices in Education (ICRPE). Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad. 
  83. Saidon, M. A., Said, N. E. M., Soh, T. M. T., & Husnin, H. (2018). ESL Students' Perception of Teacher's Written Feedback Practice in Malaysian Classrooms. Creative Education, 09(14), 2300-2310. 
  84. Chalmers, C., Mowat, E., & Chapman, M. (2018). Marking and providing feedback face-to-face: Staff and student perspectives. Active Learning in Higher Education, 19(1), 35-45. 
  85. Tan, F. D., Whipp, P. R., Gagne, M., & Van Quaquebeke, N. (2019). Students' perception of teachers' two-way feedback interactions that impact learning. Social Psychology of Education, 22, 169-187. 
  86. Fernandez-Toro, M., & Hurd, S. (2014). A model of factors affecting independent learners' engagement with feedback on language learning tasks. Distance education, 35(1), 106-125. 
  87. Al-Bashir, M., Kabir, R., & Rahman, I. (2016). The value and effectiveness of feedback in improving students' learning and professionalizing teaching in higher education. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(16), 38-41. 
  88. Masantiah, C., Pasiphol, S., & Tangdhanakanond, K. (2020). Student and feedback: Which type of feedback is preferable?. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 41(2), 269-274. 
  89. Martin, S., & Alvarez, V. I. M. (2017). Students' feedback beliefs and anxiety in online foreign language oral tasks. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1). 
  90. Abdullah, M. Y., Hussin, S., & Shakir, M. (2018). The effect of peers' and teacher's E-feedback on writing anxiety level through CMC applications. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(11), 196-207. 
  91. Rajab, M. H., Gazal, A. M., Alkattan, K., & Rajab, M. H. (2020). Challenges to online medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cureus, 12(7). 
  92. Schussler, E. E., Weatherton, M., Chen Musgrove, M. M., Brigati, J. R., & England, B. J. (2021). Student perceptions of instructor supportiveness: What characteristics make a difference?. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 20(2), ar29.