Very little is known about the impact of the different types of feedback on students’ academic performance. This article explores students’ preference in the use of audio and written feedback and how each type of feedback received by students impacts their academic performance in subsequent assignments. The study involved 68 students who were divided into two groups that received either audio or written feedback in their first assignment which was then recalled and applied into the second assignment. An analysis of results obtained in the second assignment was conducted and comparisons made between students in the audio and written feedback group. Students were also surveyed using an online questionnaire to ascertain their perceptions about the type of feedback they had received. The study established that the type of feedback received did not impact students’ grades in the subsequent assignment. In addition, while students were broadly positive about audio feedback, they indicated a strong preference for written feedback in future assignments. The study recommends, among other things, further investigation into the link between students’ learning styles and their preferences for different types of feedback.
BevanRBadgeJCannA. (2008) Seeing eye-to-eye? Staff and student views on feedback. Bioscience Education12(1): 1–15.
2.
BiggsJBTangC (2007) Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill Education.
3.
BrearleyFQCullenRW (2012) Providing students with formative audio feedback. Bioscience Education20(1): 22–36.
4.
CannA (2014) Engaging students with audio feedback. Bioscience Education22(1): 31–41.
5.
CarruthersCMcCarronBBolanP (2014) Listening and learning: Reflections on the use of audio feedback – An excellence in teaching and learning note. Business and Management Education in Higher Education1(1): 4–11.
6.
CoffieldFMoseleyDHallE. (2004) Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 Learning: A Systematic and Critical Review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.
7.
DuncanN (2007) Feed-forward: Improving students’ use of tutors’ comments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education32(3): 271–83.
8.
FelderRMSilvermanLK (1988) Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education78(7): 674–81.
9.
FieldingAFDunleavyPJLanganAM (2010) Interpreting context to the UK’s National Student (Satisfaction) Survey data for science subjects. Journal of Further and Higher Education34(3): 347–68.
10.
FlemmingNA (2007) VARK–A guide to your learning preferences. Available at: http://vark-learn.com/ (accessed 4 March 2016).
11.
GibbsGSimpsonC (2004) Conditions under which assessment supports learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education1(1): 3–31.
12.
HandleyKPriceMMillarJ (2011) Beyond doing time: Investigating the concept of student engagement with feedback. Oxford Review of Education37(4): 543–60.
13.
HattieJTimperleyH (2007) The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research77(1): 81–112.
14.
HepplestoneSChikwaG (2014) Understanding how students process and use feedback to support their learning. Practitioner Research in Higher Education8(1): 41–53.
15.
IcePCurtisRPhillipsP. (2007) Using asynchronous audio feedback to enhance teaching presence and students’ sense of community. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks11(2): 3–23.
16.
KingDMcGuganSBunyanN (2008) Does it make a difference? Replacing text with audio feedback. Practice and Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education3(2): 145–63.
LuntTCurranJ (2009) Are you listening please? The advantages of electronic audio feedback compared to written feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education35(7): 759–69.
MerrySOrsmondP (2008) Students’ attitudes to and usage of academic feedback provided via audio files. Bioscience Education11(3): 1–11.
21.
NicolDJMacFarlane-DickD (2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education30(2): 199–218.
22.
OrsmondPMerrySReilingK (2005) Biology students’ utilisation of tutors’ formative feedback: A qualitative interview study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education30(4): 369–86.
23.
ParikhAMcReelisKHodgesB (2001) Student feedback in problem based learning: A survey of 103 final year students across five Ontario medical schools. Medical Education35(1): 632–36.
24.
ParkinHJHepplestoneSGoldenG. (2012) A role for technology in enhancing students’ engagement with feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education37(1): 963–73.
25.
PokornyHPickfordP (2010) Complexity, cue and relationships: Student perceptions of feedback. Active Learning in Higher Education11(1): 21–30.
26.
PriceMHandleyKMillarJ. (2010) Feedback all that effort but what is the effect?Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education35(3): 277–89.
27.
RotherhamB (2007) Using an MP3 recorder to give feedback on student assignments. Educational Developments8(2): 7–10.
28.
RoweADWoodLN (2008) Student perceptions and preferences for feedback. Asian Social Science4(3): 1–11.
29.
RuckerMLThompsonS (2003) Assessing student learning outcomes: An investigation of the relationship among feedback measures. College Student Journal37(3): 400–04.
30.
SadlerDR (2010) Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education35(5): 535–50.
31.
ScottJShieldsCGardnerJ. (2011) Student engagement with feedback. Bioscience Education18(1): 1–9.
32.
WeaverMR (2006) Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education31(3): 379–94.
33.
YangMCarlessD (2013) The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes. Teaching in Higher Education18(3): 285–95.
