In the synchronous, in-person learning environment, structured formal feedback is supplemented by informal incidental or experiential feedback (referred to as co-regulation) where students informally calibrate their think- ing against their peers and the teacher’s explanations.18 In addition to imme- diately reviewing student work, teachers will ‘read’ the room in terms of students’ body language and facial expressions so they can respond immedi- ately. In online learning environments, opportunities for dynamic informal feedback are difficult to engineer; they need to be deliberately designed into the interactions that are facilitated online. Indeed, a recent study compar- ing online, and blended learning environments observed that a higher inter- action frequency with the teacher increased the chance that the students adopted the teacher’s regulatory strategies.18 Figure 27.1 displays the differ- ent interactions that are important in online learning environments anno- tated with potential combinations and forms of feedback.3
Figure 27.1 Sources and formats of feedback in online learning environments.
Downloaded from http://books.rsc.org/books/edited-volume/chapter-pdf/1746509/bk9781839165238-00352.pdf by RMIT University user on 06 February 2024
357 Embedding Feedback in Digital Learning Environments
Self-assessment, reflection and self-regulation by learners can be enabled through the provision of multiple feedback events (different sources) and synthesis across multiple processes.4,7,12 There is an opportunity to inten- tionally design technology-enabled formative feedback mechanisms that develop these skills in chemistry learners through provision of timely feed- back. This chapter describes multiple interventions that aim to achieve this while responding to access and participation in learning.
In Australia, large first-year chemistry classes represent diverse cohorts based on the multiple pathways that students have transitioned from high school contexts, international contexts and their different stages of educa- tion. Inclusive practice includes the introduction of pedagogies and practices that provide students with flexibility and multiple means of engaging with learning and assessment.1,2 The provision of multiple modes and categories of feedback, as part of the designing activities that widen equitable access and participation in online active learning, is one strategy to increase student confidence. Strategic embedding of formative feedback, with a focus on dia- logic and peer feedback, has potential to support students in self-regulatory processing and subsequent actions to fill any perceived gaps in their under- standing. These approaches are described further in this chapter including examples of practice.
27.3.1 Methods (Design-based Research in Action)
Application of a design-based research (DBr) methodology19 supports the adaptation of a single course across multiple semesters involving collection, reflection on and response to empirical research data. In the context of this study, annual evaluation and reflection cycles resulted in the progressive introduction of scaffolding for provision of different forms of formative feed- back in increasingly blended learning courses. The iterative evaluation cycles involving combinations of feedback strategies are summarised in Table 27.2, these interventions are described below.
The standard formats of feedback that arise from active learning lectures and laboratory practical sessions based on dialogic interactions between students, their teachers, tutors and peers are recognised in Table 27.3. The course included peer-assisted study sessions (pASS) led by senior undergrad- uate students. exams, quizzes and problem-solving pASS worksheets were assigned as providing both verification and elaborative feedback based on correct answers, grades and worked solutions. Modelling feedback is inte- grated into lectures and pASS through the teachers’ use of structural models and visualiser tools.
27.3.2 Feedback Interventions
The initial intervention in 2014 introduced online modules that were designed to engage students to consider their prior knowledge based on provision of formative feedback then directed them to self-regulated learning activities
Downloaded from http://books.rsc.org/books/edited-volume/chapter-pdf/1746509/bk9781839165238-00352.pdf by RMIT University user on 06 February 2024
Chapter 27 358
Table 27.2 Schematic representation illustrating the different forms of feedback that were progressively incorporated in a first semester general chemis- try course. Online activities were optional between 2014 and 2018 but were formally embedded as part of a blended learning course transfor- mation in 2019. All learning activities were 100% online in 2020 due to the COVID pandemic.
Table 27.3 example references are provided to give insights into 2014 students’
thinking.
Theme (properties) example responses
Verification Feedback Providing me with solutions for the working out of ques- tions is a very helpful type of feedback. When it comes to handing in assignments and other online activities, I find it very helpful is feedback is given on what I need to correct. For example, in an equation question, hav- ing feedback on what I did wrong with the working out is very helpful.
Downloaded from http://books.rsc.org/books/edited-volume/chapter-pdf/1746509/bk9781839165238-00352.pdf by RMIT University user on 06 February 2024
359 Embedding Feedback in Digital Learning Environments
Theme (properties) example responses references to seeking:
● a correct answer
● grades
● worked solutions
● more tests or quizzes.
By giving students the solutions to all the questions that are asked in lectures, pass classes and past exams, which you have done to some degree. Some students obviously would use this to help work out the answers. The solutions would be really helpful, especially with calculations.
Don’t need feedback, as long as the answers for CROM and PASS are posted and I’m getting the questions right, that’s enough positive feedback for me.
Dialogic Feedback Have one on one sessions with the teachers and talk about assessment and the area where u might need improvement. Students could make appointments for these sessions as it is not plausible for teachers to have sessions with every student and this way only the ones that are really keen will make the effort.
references to seeking:
● one-on-one advice
● pASS leader advice
● being told what to do
● verbal explanation.
In person like PASS. I can ask questions and get answers to things I didn’t get.
verbal explaining why the answer is incorrect and explaining correct method to get the answer.
Written Feedback Written feedback. It is easier to understand, and we can review the feedback as much as we can. It’s better than audio feedback because we might miss out some words as they may speak too fast or maybe because of the accent that is difficult to catch.
references to seeking:
● written feedback
● comments on work
● emailed advice
Written feedback is useful for referring back to later People giving you marks with written feedback on it,
kinda personalized, you know? Like the labs, that was the best feedback in the course. The exam viewing ses- sions are bad cause it comes out of our time.
Peer dialogic feedback I think the best form of providing feedback is peer study- ing. When you study together in a group, it is easier to recognise your level of understanding and knowl- edge. Thanks to that, we can study more or revise better.
references to seeking:
● self-calibration against other students
● student explanations.
I like being able to discuss concepts and problems in a small group until we all understand them, because explaining things back and forth is really helpful to my learning.
Self-regulatory feedback I know what how I learn and what works for me, so the weekly CROMs and questions provided in lec- tures and PASS, provided me with feedback which allowed me to identify gaps in my knowledge and understanding.
Table 27.3 (continued)
(continued)
Downloaded from http://books.rsc.org/books/edited-volume/chapter-pdf/1746509/bk9781839165238-00352.pdf by RMIT University user on 06 February 2024
Chapter 27 360
involving facilitative feedback in online modules. This initiative has been described in detail elsewhere.1,2,4,9,17 These weekly chemistry review online learning modules (CrOMs) diagnose high school conceptions using a concept inventory tool20 linked to individual formative feedback rather than the correct answer (no course marks). Based on their answers to these concept questions, students were directed to self-regulated online learning activities situated in a dedicated folder in the learning management system (Blackboard™). Stu- dents were encouraged to complete these first two formative steps in the mod- ule prior to completing the summative online quiz (course marks) that tested the week’s lecture concepts. Annual evaluation data was collected through an end of semester online questionnaire that captured demographic data, likert- style scales and open response items. The student assessment of their learning gains (SAlG) instrument21 was adapted for this context and used to collect per- ception data. An incentive of 1% bonus marks was offered in 2014 providing a high response rate. Insights from two specific likert-style items from the SAlG scale are considered further in this chapter to explore students’ perceptions of the extent to which learning activities and assessment helped their learning.
The course structure of activities and assessment were retained between 2014 and 2018 with the only change being the quiz platform in 2015 (from Black- board tests to an external provider, Sapling).
with an increasing focus on blended learning, a new task was introduced applying pedagogical design to increase peer interactions and involving embedded dialogic and reflective feedback. This online, collaborative peer discourse (CpD) activity was trialed in 2018 (hence was optional for students) but became linked indirectly to summative course marks in the following year. In 2019, funded through an institutional initiative to transform tradi- tional courses into blended learning courses, the CrOMs (online learning modules) were translated into the edX edge online learning platform and formally embedded as weekly pre-lecture preparation.
reflecting on the previous annual evaluation data, a need was identified to increase the value of interactions between students and their peers, hence
‘Blended learning Tasks’ that applied technology-enabled peer discourse Theme (properties) example responses
references to:
● a link between feedback and thinking
● intent to act on feedback
● reflection on thinking
I found mid-semester exam was a great indicator of how well I was going in the course and showed me that I needed to change my studying habits and try harder as I wasn’t do as well as I thought I was.
An example of where feedback was used effectively to support the way I learned that is already present in the course is the PASS questions as it enabled a week by week evaluation of which concepts were struggled with and provided the ability to develop understand- ing in these certain areas.
Table 27.3 (continued)
Downloaded from http://books.rsc.org/books/edited-volume/chapter-pdf/1746509/bk9781839165238-00352.pdf by RMIT University user on 06 February 2024
361 Embedding Feedback in Digital Learning Environments
feedback were introduced. These tasks were also designed to strengthen the interactions between students and instructors as well as students with students in active lectures. For brevity, only sufficient details to establish the nature of feedback (dialogic, peer, self-regulatory and modelling) that is involved in these tasks are provided in this chapter.
● Collaborative peer discourse task (CpD): facilitated through a custom- made digital platform, integrated into Blackboard. Students are guided stepwise through a process of submitting an individual explanation of the real-world concepts that underpin a real-world phenomenon observed in a video. Then, as part of a group of four, students collabora- tively and synchronously consider their different individual explanations to derive a consensus explanation. The final step involves reflection on thinking as a result of the group discussion. Students can engage with dialogic, peer and self-regulatory feedback through reflection.
● Digital noticeboard task (padlet): delivered through the edX edge plat- form, students are required to hand draw their representation of either a structure or chemical system, capture the drawing digitally and anon- ymously submit them to a padlet wall. The lecturer reviews the class submissions to identify incorrect use of chemical representational formalisms and misconceptions. Students have access to the submis- sions of peers and can evaluate and calibrate their own thinking.8 Dia- logic elaboration and modelling feedback is introduced into the lecture involving the discussion of the correct representation of either the structure or chemical system.
All evaluation data have been collected through procedures that have been approved by the institutional ethics review committee.