|
Title:
|
DELIVERING SCREEN-CAST FEEDBACK ON ASSESSMENTS TO LARGE COHORTS |
|
Author(s):
|
Lim Teoh, Pru Marriott |
|
ISBN:
|
978-972-8939-38-0 |
|
Editors:
|
Miguel Baptista Nunes and Pedro Isaías |
|
Year:
|
2011 |
|
Edition:
|
Volume I |
|
Keywords:
|
Screencast feedback, screen capture feedback, innovative feedback, assessment, student perceptions. |
|
Type:
|
Full Paper |
|
First Page:
|
329 |
|
Last Page:
|
336 |
|
Language:
|
English |
|
Cover:
|
|
|
Full Contents:
|
click to dowload 
|
|
Paper Abstract:
|
In the UK, assessment and feedback have been regularly highlighted by the National Student Survey (NSS) since 2005 as one of the critical aspects that require improvement. For the more discerning students traditional written feedback may be inadequate to meet their needs and alternative feedback mechanisms are being sought. For the less judicious students, alternative forms of feedback may be the antidote for what can sometimes be called student apathy towards feedback and the feedback process. There have been many innovative approaches to delivering feedback and one that has proved successful with English language students involves the use of screen cast (or screen capture) technology. The technology records feedback on assessments into a digital video, together with audio narration, and provides students with personalised comments in an easy to follow and interesting way. The question remains, however, whether this type of feedback can be applied in a business and accounting context to large cohorts of students in higher education and whether the students perceptions of the technology are as positive as their counterparts studying English. The paper reports the findings of the first study to be conducted with accounting students. Screencast technology was introduced on the first year undergraduate Managing Finance module. Student responses (n = 124) were very positive towards the introduction of audio and visual feedback with only a small percentage (10%) expressing a preference for traditional written feedback. The implications and limitations of the study and areas for further research are discussed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
