Investigating the Dialogic Feedback process using KaizenaManuel Herrera MA in ELT with ICT & MM The University of Warwick

Personal Information

MA in ELT with ICT & MMTwitter: @ManuelHerreraMlearnenglish2gether.wordpress.commanuel.herrera.m@gmail.com

Background information• Feedback is considered “one of the most powerful influences in

learning” (Hattie, 2007, p.1)

• Current practices of providing feedback are no longer effective (Hepplestone et al., 2009, p. 2).

• Teachers often have a sense that they are not making use of its full potential (Hyland and Hyland, 2006, p. 1).

• Lack and availability of feedback is criticized by students (Boud & Molloy, 2013)

Much of this dissatisfaction happens in the context of written feedback “impoverished dialogue” (Nicol, 2010, p. 501). Problem with written feedback: • Time-consuming • Difficult to understand • Exhausting task for staff. (Bloxham & Boyd, 2007; Higgins et al.,

2002).

Challenge to increase the dialogue:• Increased class sizes• Resource constraints• Staff workload (Orsmond et at., 2013, p. 243)

Research objectivesThe aim is to look at how to make podcasting processes more dialogic. The research objectives are:

(1) to identify how podcasting and the cover letter can facilitate dialogue,

(2) to evaluate how the Cover Letter encourages students to participate in it and

(3) to formulate a framework for using audio feedback as a dialogic process.

Audio feedback“aids the gaining and sharing of knowledge and can facilitate discussions between students and tutors” (Orsmond et al., 2013, p. 243).

It is not a new phenomenon

It can:• improve students’ experience of receiving it (Merry & Orsmond, 2008), • feeling more personalised (King, McGugan, and Bunyan 2008), • reduce time, as it is more efficient, and also• reduce costs as being cheaper (Hennessy & Forrester, 2014).

Audio feedback challengesFeedback should be a dialogue, not only transmission of information (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, 2006)

Feedback must trigger inner dialogue in students’ minds (Nicol, 2010, p. 504).

Audio feedback, it is still in most cases a monologue, and it is difficult for students to reply

Being a separate file from the written paper is another drawback of the audio feedback

Towards a dialogic feedback process• There is a growing interest in how technology can enhance the

feedback process.• Different experiences: audio, video, screencasts and e-feedback• It is not only the technology that it is used to give feedback• There is little evidence of how to design and implement such

feedback• This investigation proposes two possible solutions to address this

problem that are the use of a Cover Letter and Kaizena.

Summary of audio feedback problems• Podcasting is still a monologue. • It is in most cases a separate file.• it is not on the same assignment page. • it is still hard to students to reply.• There are limitations with the software to create the file.• It is separated from the paper.• It is also hard for students to focus on the feedback given by

their teachers.

KaizenaKaizena helps in making the audio feedback process more simple and easy to do: • Audio comments can be added directly to the page. • They are recorded and kept on the cloud.• They will be available to access online. • With the highlighting tool, the students can focus their attention where

the teacher has pointed out• Students can reply using the same application on the same page • Could enable the feedback dialogue process to take place.

https://kaizena.com/

Video tutorials: Kaizena“Creating a Gmail account: a tutorial for students and teachers”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d3n4xF05z4“How to use Kaizena”, teacher’s version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9bloTyGHAc“How to use Kaizena”, students’ version:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nRMD1tMxSU

The Cover Sheet• “Students can prompt dialogue on the issues of

importance to them” (Bloxham & Campbell, 2010, p. 4)• They might identify different areas they would likely need

some help (McKeachie (2002)• Students requesting feedback “empowers them more

than just receiving feedback” (Nicol, 2010, p. 507)• Cover sheet example: https://goo.gl/3gn0aG

Research MethodsThis case study took place in a private and successful primary and secondary school in Chile

There is a total of 45 students divided into four groups: • Tercero Medio PET: 11 students.• Tercero Medio FCE: 11 students.• Cuarto Medio PET: 11 students.• Cuarto Medio FCE: 12 students. Two English teachers are in charge of the groups. One of them is in charge of the PET group and the other of the FCE one.

A pilot study was made with the teachers using Kaizena podcasting too

Teachers experienced the use of the application in the role of teacher and of student. The Cover Letter was designed based on (Bloxham & Campbell, 2010; Elbow & Sorcinelli, 2010;) together with the teachers of the school.

The students were shown the letter and video tutorials of Kaizena in classes to solve their doubts and help them to understand the use of them.

The main aim of this research is to look at how to make the podcasting process more dialogic.

Providing this framework (Cover Letter + Kaizena podcasting), and encouraging both teachers and students to ask and reply using the solutions.

Questionnaire, Interviews and analysis of the interactions were done.

Findings and discussionBoth teachers preferred audio feedback after the case study took place.However, the great majority of the students chose face-to-face (oral) feedback as their main preference

79% of the students reported not asking for clarification

Both teachers describe the podcasting tool to be a faster experience than written feedback

Teachers expressed the Cover Sheet is a good way to focus and guide the feedback process on what the students wanted

Students also reported that the Cover Sheet helped them to let the teachers focus on what they want

Students mention the importance of having feedback on the same page or document

79% students reported this framework could enhance the feedback as a dialogue

79%

18%

4%

Can this framework enhanced the feedback as a dialogue?

Yes Maybe No

Limitations

written feedback is still the dominant form of providing students their feedback

Conclusion Objective 1: to identify how podcasting and the cover letter can facilitate dialogue

The combination of both solutions can assure the initiation of an in deep conversation, one that could lead to a more engaged and frankly dialogue between teachers and students

Objective 2: to evaluate how the Cover Letter encourages students to participate in the dialogue

It gives the students the necessary tools and alignments to request feedback and promotes further interactions.

Objective 3: to formulate a framework for using audio feedback as a dialogic process

Both tools used in combination might encourage feedback as dialogue, also that it could enhance the feedback and it is necessary to be used under a learner-centred approach of learning. However, context and feedback culture of the institution must be taken into consideration.

Recommendations for future research• A different combination of some kinds of feedback, for example, written and audio

feedback, with a cover letter and analyse the different interactions of both solutions.

• The culture of feedback of the institution(s) or context in which the research would take place

• The capabilities of Kaizena not only as podcasting tool to provide feedback, but as a learning tools to improve the four skills of the English language learning (Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing) in an online/blended learning environment.

• The general improvements of the students’ progress in Writing after participating on a dialogic feedback experience

Thank you very much!

ReferencesBloxham, S., & Campbell, L. (2010). Generating dialogue in assessment feedback: Exploring the use of interactive cover sheets. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3), 291-300.

Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712.

Elbow, P., and M.D. Sorcinelli. (2010). How to enhance learning by using high-stakes and low-stakes writing. In McKeachie’s teachng tips, ed. W.J. McKeachie and M. Svinicki, 213–234. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.

Hepplestone, S., Parkin, H., Holden, G., Irwin, B., & Thorpe, L. (2009). Technology, Feedback, Action!: The impact of learning technology upon students' engagement with their feedback. A Word In Your Ear, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK, 18.

Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language teaching, 39(02), 83-101.

Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501-517. 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(2), 199-218. McKeachie, W. J., & Hofer, B. K. (2002). McKeachie's teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Orsmond, P., Maw, S. J., Park, J. R., Gomez, S., & Crook, A. C. (2013). Moving feedback forward: theory to practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(2), 240-252.