Characteristics of productive feedback encounters in online learning

References

• Angelone, L. 2019. Virtual ethnography: The post possibilities of not being there. Mid-Western Educational Researcher 31, no. 3: 275–95.
   Google Scholar
• Attali, Y., and F. van der Kleij. 2017. Effects of feedback elaboration and feedback timing during computer-based practice in mathematics problem solving. Computers & Education 110: 154–69. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bearman, M., and R. Ajjawi. 2021. Can a rubric do more than be transparent? Invitation as a new metaphor for assessment criteria. Studies in Higher Education 46: 359–368. doi:10.1080/03075079.2019.1637842.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bearman, M., S. Lambert, and M. O’Donnell. 2021. How a centralised approach to learning design influences students: A mixed methods study. Higher Education Research & Development 40: 692–705. doi:10.1080/07294360.2020.1792849.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boud, D., and E. Molloy. 2013. Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38, no. 6: 698–712. doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.691462.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson, P., and M. Henderson. 2017. How does technology enable scaling up assessment for learning? In Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education, edited by David Carless, Susan M. Bridges, Cecilia Ka Yuk Chan, and Rick Glofcheski, 209–22. Singapore: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Dawson, P., M. Henderson, P. Mahoney, M. Phillips, T. Ryan, D. Boud, and E. Molloy. 2019. What makes for effective feedback: Staff and student perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 44, no. 1: 25–36. doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1467877.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson, P., M. Henderson, T. Ryan, P. Mahoney, D. Boud, M. Phillips, and E. Molloy. 2018. Technology and feedback design. In Learning, design, and technology: An international compendium of theory, research, practice, and policy, edited by Michael J. Spector, Barbara B. Lockee, and Marcus D. Childress, 1–45. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Esterhazy, R. 2018. What matters for productive feedback? Disciplinary practices and their relational dynamics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 43, no. 8: 1302–14. doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1463353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esterhazy, R. 2019. Re-conceptualizing feedback through a sociocultural lens. In The impact of feedback in higher education, edited by Michael Henderson, Rola Ajjawi, David Boud, and Elizabeth Molloy, 67–82. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Fawns, T. 2019. Postdigital education in design and practice. Postdigital Science and Education 1, no. 1: 132–45. doi:10.1007/s42438-018-0021-8.
   Google Scholar
• Goodyear, P., L. Carvalho, and P. Yeoman. 2021. Activity-centred analysis and design (ACAD): Core purposes, distinctive qualities and current developments. Educational Technology Research and Development 69, no. 2: 445–64. doi:10.1007/s11423-020-09926-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gravett, K. 2022. Feedback literacies as sociomaterial practice. Critical Studies in Education 63, no. 2: 261–74. doi:10.1080/17508487.2020.1747099.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie, J., and H. Timperley. 2007. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77, no. 1: 81–112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, M., R. Ajjawi, D. Boud, and E. Molloy. 2019. The impact of feedback in higher education: Improving assessment outcomes for learners. Cham: Springer Nature.
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, M., M. Phillips, T. Ryan, D. Boud, P. Dawson, E. Molloy, and P. Mahoney. 2019. Conditions that enable effective feedback. Higher Education Research & Development 38, no. 7: 1401–16. doi:10.1080/07294360.2019.1657807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hine, C. 2017. From virtual ethnography to the embedded, embodied, everyday internet. In The Routledge companion to digital ethnography, 47–54. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, L.X., M. Bearman, and D. Boud. 2021. Understanding feedback in online learning – a critical review and metaphor analysis. Computers & Education 173: 104271. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104271.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, L.X., M. Bearman, and D. Boud. 2023. Feedback encounters: Towards a framework for analysing and understanding feedback processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 48: 121–134. doi:10.1080/02602938.2022.2059446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, L.X., M. Bearman, D. Boud, and F. Konradsen. 2022. Digital ethnography in higher education teaching and learning—a methodological review. Higher Education 84: 1143–1162. doi:10.1007/s10734-022-00838-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonsson, A. 2013. Facilitating productive use of feedback in higher education. Active Learning in Higher Education 14, no. 1: 63–76. doi:10.1177/1469787412467125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulik, J.A., and C.-L.C. Kulik. 1988. Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research 58, no. 1: 79–97. doi:10.3102/00346543058001079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, J., and R. De Luca. 2014. Review of assessment feedback. Studies in Higher Education 39, no. 2: 378–93. doi:10.1080/03075079.2012.709494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y.S. 1995. Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry 1, no. 3: 275–89. doi:10.1177/107780049500100301.
   Google Scholar
• Paassen, B., B. Mokbel, and B. Hammer. 2016. Adaptive structure metrics for automated feedback provision in intelligent tutoring systems. Neurocomputing 192: 3–13. doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2015.12.108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panadero, E., G.T.L. Brown, and J.-W. Strijbos. 2016. The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review 28, no. 4: 803–30. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9350-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pink, S., H. Horst, J. Postill, L. Hjorth, T. Lewis, and J. Tacchi. 2016. Digital ethnography: Principles and practice. London, UK: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler, D.R. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science 18, no. 2: 119–44. doi:10.1007/bf00117714.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shute, V.J. 2008. Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research 78, no. 1: 153–89. doi:10.3102/0034654307313795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Popta, E., M. Kral, G. Camp, R.L. Martens, and P.R.-J. Simons. 2017. Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider. Educational Research Review 20: 24–34. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2016.10.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiliam, D. 2011. What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation 37, no. 1: 3–14. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001.
   Google Scholar
• Winstone, N.E., D. Boud, P. Dawson, and M. Heron. 2022. From feedback-as-information to feedback-as-process: A linguistic analysis of the feedback literature. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 47: 213–230. doi:10.1080/02602938.2021.1902467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winstone, N.E., J. Bourne, E. Medland, I. Niculescu, and R. Rees. 2021. “Check the grade, log out”: Students’ engagement with feedback in learning management systems. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 46: 631–643. doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1787331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winstone, N.E., and D. Carless. 2019. Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Worth, N. 2009. Making use of audio diaries in research with young people: Examining narrative, participation and audience. Sociological Research Online 14, no. 4: 77–87. doi:10.5153/sro.1967.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar