Utilising lecturer input to inform the design of an audio e-assessment tool

References

• Altbach PG, Reisberg L, Rumbley LE. 2009. Trends in global higher education: Tracking an academic revolution. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. http://www.cep.edu.rs/public/Altbach,_Reisberg,_Rumbley_Tracking_an_Academic_Revolution,_UNESCO_2009.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Baker NL. 2014. ‘Get it off my stack’: Teachers’ tools for grading papers. Assessing Writing 19: 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayerlein L. 2014. Students’ feedback preferences: how do students react to timely and automatically generated assessment feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 39(8): 916–931. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.870531
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biggs J. 2003. Teaching for quality learning at University. (2nd edn). Buckingham: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bilbro J, Iluzado C, Clark DE. 2013. Responding effectively to composition students: Comparing student perceptions of written and audio feedback. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching 24(1): 47–83.
   Google Scholar
• Bourgault AM, Mundy C, Joshua T. 2013. Comparison of audio vs. written feedback on clinical assignments of nursing students. Nursing Education Perspective 34(1): 43–46. https://doi.org/10.5480/1536-5026-34.1.43
   Google Scholar
• Brearley FQ, Cullen WR. 2012. Providing students with formative audio feedback. Bioscience Education 20(1): 22–36. https://doi.org/10.11120/beej.2012.20000022
   Google Scholar
• Buckley P. 2012. Can the effectiveness of different forms of feedback be measured? Retention and student preference for written and verbal feedback in level 4 bioscience students. Journal of Biological Education 46(4): 242–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2012.702676
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carruthers C, McCarron B, Bolan P, Devine A, McMahon-Beattie U, Burns A. 2015. ‘I like the sound of that’ – An evaluation of providing audio feedback via the virtual learning environment for summative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 40(3): 352–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.917145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavanaugh AJ, Song L. 2014. Audio feedback versus written feedback: Instructors’ and students’ perspectives. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 10(1): 122–138.
   Google Scholar
• Chew E. 2014. ‘To listen or to read?’ Audio or written assessment feedback for international students in the UK. On the Horizon 22(2): 127–135. doi: 10.1108/OTH-07-2013-0026
   Google Scholar
• Creswell JW, Piano CL. 2011. Mixing And Conducting Mixed Methods Research. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell JW, Poth CN. 2018. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Cryer P, Kaikumba N. 1987. Audio-cassette tape as a means of giving feedback on written work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 12(2): 148–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293870120207
   Google Scholar
• Delport CSL, De Vos AS. 2011. Professional research and professional practice. In: De Vos AS, Strydom H, Fouche CB, Delport CSL (eds), Research at grassroots for the social sciences and human service professions. Pretoria: Van Schaik. Ch. 3.
   Google Scholar
• Ekinsmyth C. 2010. Reflections on using digintal audio to give assessment feedback. Planet 23(1): 74–77. https://doi.org/10.11120/plan.2010.00230074
   Google Scholar
• Erasmus J. 2015. SA education is rubbish – Jonathan Jansen. https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/SA-education-is-rubbish-20150820
   Google Scholar
• Hennessy C, Forrester G. 2014. Developing a framework for effective audio feedback: a case study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 39(7): 777–789. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.870530
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higher Education South Africa. 2014. South African higher education in the 20th year of democracy: Context, achievements and key challenges. http://pmg-assets.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/140305hesa.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ice P, Curtus R, Phillips P, Wells J. 2007. Using asynchronous audio feedback to enhance teaching presence and students’ sense of community. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(1): 48–76. doi: 10.1177/2345678906292462
   Google Scholar
• Ice P, Swan K, Diaz S, Kupczynski L, Swan-Dagen A. 2010. An analysis of students’ perceptions of the value and efficacy of instructors’ auditory and text-based feedback modalities across multiple conceptual levels. Educational Computing and Research 43(1): 113–134. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.43.1.g
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobowitz J, Shanan J. 1982. Higher education for the seond half of life: The state of the art and future perspectives. Educational Gerontology8 (6): 545–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/0360127820080603
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jollands M, McCallum N, Bondy J. 2011. Assessment: ‘If students want feedback why don’t they collect their assignments?’ In: Grainger S, Kestell C (eds), Engineering Education: An Australian Perspective Essex: Multi-Science Publishing Co. Ltd. pp. 333–340.
   Google Scholar
• Kaizena. 2016. Fast, personal feedback on student work. https://www.kaizena.com/
   Google Scholar
• Keane K, McCrea D, Russell M. 2018. Personalizing feedback using voice comments. Open Praxis 10(4): 309–324. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.10.4.909
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krashen SD. 1985. The input hypothesis: Issues and implication. Harlow: Longman Group.
   Google Scholar
• Laughton D. 2013. Using audio feedback to enhance assessment practice: An evaluation of student and tutor experiences. Student Engagement and Experience Journal 2(2): 2–20. doi: 10.7190/seej.v2i2.68
   Google Scholar
• Lee I. 2014. Feedback in writing: Issues and challenges. Assessing Writing 19: 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunt T, Curran J. 2010. ‘Are you listening please?’ The advantages of electroning audio feedback compared to written feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35(7): 759–769. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902977772
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maree K. 2007. First Steps in Research. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy J. 2015. Evaluating written, audio and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research 25(2): 153–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merriam SB. 2009. Qualitative Research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Merry S, Orsmond P. 2008. Students’ attitudes to and usage of academic feedback. Bioscience Education E-Journal 11(3). http://doi.org/10.3108/beej.11.3
   Google Scholar
• Ngoepe K. 2016. More students, no fees, puts pressure on universities. https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/more-students-no-fees-puts-pressure-on-universities-20160810
   Google Scholar
• North-West University. 2016. NWU teaching and learning strategy 2016-2020. http://www.nwu.ac.za/sites/www.nwu.ac.za/files/files/i-governance-management/documents/2017.NWU.TeachingLearningStrategy.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pool J. 2014. An investigation of communities of inquiry within a blended mode of delivery for technology education. PhD thesis, North-West University, Potchefstroom.
   Google Scholar
• Price M. 2013. Not a simple sum. Financial Mail. http://www.financialmail.co.za/fm/Columns/2013/08/22/not-a-simple-sum
   Google Scholar
• Richester C, France D, Wakefield K. 2008. ‘It was just like using a personal tutorial’: Using podcasts to provide assessment feedback. Higher Education Academy Conference, July. Harrogate.
   Google Scholar
• Rawle F, Thuna M, Zhao T, Kaler M. 2018. Audio feedback: Student and teaching assistant perspectives on an alternative mode of feedback for written assignments. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 9(2): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2018.2.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotheram B. 2009. Sounds good: Using digital audio for evaluation feedback. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching 2: 176–179. https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v2i0.3224
   Google Scholar
• Truscott J. 1996. The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning 46(2): 327–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Dyk TJ. 2005. Towards providing effective academic literacy intervention. Per Linguam 21(2): 38–51.
   Google Scholar
• Wang F, Hannafin MJ. 2005. Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development 53(4): 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wicks D. 2010. Audioboo in education. https://audioboom.com/boos/216618-audioboo-in-education
   Google Scholar
• Williams LF. 1980. Toward a realistic teacher workload. The English Journal 69(5): 9–11. https://doi.org/10.2307/817620
   Google Scholar
• Wimba. 2009. Wimba Voice Version 6.0 User Guide. http://www.wimba.com/assets/resources/WV_60_user_guide.pdf.
   Google Scholar