Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Językoznawstwo baner

No. 1/18 (2023)

Articles

Virtual feedback

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25312/2391-5137.18/2023_09ap  [Google Scholar]
Published: 2023-06-14

Abstract

Feedback is a complex issue that can be discussed from many perspectives. It can be given by teachers to students, by students to teachers, by students to students, by teachers to teachers. Moreover, nowadays thanks to technology our students can be offered automatic feedback that will be given to them immediately upon completing a task. Even though there are several texts dealing with feedback that students receive from teachers, it seems that not much research has been done on other types of feedback. This article aims to start a discussion on the different types of feedback as well as to show ways in which technology can be useful in terms of giving and eliciting feedback.

References

  1. AbuSeileek A., Abualsha’r A. (2014), Using peer computer-mediated corrective feedback to support EFl learner’s writing, “Language Learning & Technology”, 18 (1), p. 76–95; https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/7d52456d-62df-4850-8030-9d4e4f593228/content (accessed 16.08.2022). [Google Scholar]
  2. Badley G., Habeshaw T. (1991), The Changing Role of the Teacher in Higher Education, “Journal of In-Service Education” 17, p. 212–218; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0305763910170307 (accessed 16.12.2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0305763910170307 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bates A.W., Poole G. (2003), Effective teaching with technology in higher education: foundations for success, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown P.C., Roediger H.L., McDaniel M.A. (2014), Make it Stick. The science of Successful Learning, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt6wprs3 [Google Scholar]
  5. Cathcart A., Greer D., Neale L. (2014), Learner-focused evaluation cycles: facilitating learning using feedforward, concurrent and feedback evaluation, “Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education”, 39:7, p. 790–802. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.870969 [Google Scholar]
  6. Caws C. (2006), Assessing group interactions online: Students’ perspectives, “Journal of Learning Design”, 1(3), p. 19–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v1i3.23 [Google Scholar]
  7. Conaghan P., Lockey A. (2009), Feedback to feedforward, “Notfall+ Rettungsmedizin”, 12(2), p. 45–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10049-009-1222-1 [Google Scholar]
  8. Duncan N. (2007), ‘Feed‐forward’: improving students' use of tutors' comments, “Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education”, 32:3, p. 271–283 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600896498 [Google Scholar]
  9. Ferris D. (2003), Response to student writing: Implications for second language students, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410607201 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ferris D. (2006), Does error feedback help student writers? New evidence on the short- and longterm effects of written error correction [in:] K. Hyland & F. Hyland (Eds.), Feedback in second language writing: Contexts and issues (p. 81–104), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524742.007 [Google Scholar]
  11. Guénette D. (2007), Is feedback pedagogically correct?: Research design issues in studies of feedback on writing, “Journal of Second Language Writing”, Vol. 16, Issue 1, p. 40–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  12. Hepsiba N., Subhashini A., Raju M., Rao Y. P. (2016), Changing role of teachers in the present society, “International Research Journal of Engineering, IT and Scientific Research” 2(9), p. 67–72; https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/230597064.pdf (accessed 16.12.2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.21744/irjeis.v2i9.263 [Google Scholar]
  13. Koenig R. (2021), Why Professors Should Ask Students For Feedback Long Before the Semester Is Over; https://www.edsurge.com/news/2021-06-10-why-professors-should-ask-students-for-feedback-long-before-the-semester-is-over (accessed 29.11.2021). [Google Scholar]
  14. Lyster R., Ranta, L. (1997), Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms, “Studies in Second Language Acquisition”, 19, p. 37–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034 [Google Scholar]
  15. Naisbitt J. (1982), Megatrends: Ten new directions transforming our lives, Warner Books, New York. [Google Scholar]
  16. Pałczyńska A. (2021), Aktywizacja na lekcji języka obcego w nauczaniu zdalnym, „Języki Obce w Szkole”, nr 3, p. 89–94. [Google Scholar]
  17. Prensky M. (2001), Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, “On The Horizon”, nr 9, p. 3–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816 [Google Scholar]
  18. Santos M., López-Serrano S., Manchón R. (2010), The differential effect of two types of direct written corrective feedback on noticing and uptake: Reformulation vs. error correction, “International Journal of English Studies”, 10(1), p. 131–154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/1/114011 [Google Scholar]
  19. Truscott J., Hsu A.Y.-P. (2008), Error correction, revision, and learning, “Journal of Second Language Writing”, 17, p. 292–305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  20. Warschauer M. (2002), A developmental perspective on technology in language education, “TESOL Quarterly”, 36(3), p. 453–475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588421 [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.