1. Technology Enhanced Learning Symposium
Wednesday, 6 March 2013 from 13:00 to
17:00 (GMT)

2.  Effective feedback
 Technology enhanced
learning
 Individual student
learning needs
 Entrepreneurship /
Enterprise

3.  Use of audio files
 Assignment brief
 Tutorials
 PGCEL
 Review of
equipment

4.  Funding received from Leadership Foundation for
Higher Education through CfEL
 3 Focus groups from one pre-registration nursing
cohort
 All received digitally annotated scripts, plus either…
 A typed front feedback sheet
 An audio file with feedback (grade included)
 An audio file without grade (released after they had
reflected on feedback)

5.  Format of feedback
 Digital annotation
 Feedback content
 Reflective response
 Enterprise / entrepreneurial skills

6.  Those who did not receive audio file would have
preferred to have received one!
 Two groups receiving audio:
 More personal and ‘polished’
 More in-depth and ‘richer’
 Clearer and given ‘more attention’
 Listened to audio file more than they would
normally read written feedback

7.  More likely to take note of audio than written
 Made notes around audio file
 Future – only one preferred written

8.  Better than hand written - clearer
 Link between audio-file and digital comments
useful. Less obvious with typed sheet and
annotation group
 Less personal than hand written, but this depends
on whether hand written is decipherable

9.  Content biggest impact on progression and
development, rather than format
 Positive comments appreciated, especially
elaboration on ‘good point’ or ‘’
 Audio-files allow for greater expansion on feedback,
that is difficult to cover in written
 Audio-files enhance the nature of the feedback

10.  ‘I did ok but could have done better, now give me
the grade!’
 If the whole group had to do this, and all grades
released at the same time, they would be ok with
this
 Having to make a response, created more
consideration of comments
 Quick release of grade after comments received
was appreciated
 Anxiety provoking wait outweighs benefit of
reflection

11.  Self awareness
 Feedback in all groups made them more aware of their
learning needs
 Audio groups – this was more ‘evident’ due to being more
personalised – interacted more, especially delayed grade
group

12.  Collaborative working
 Typed = clearer comments, which they discussed more
with peers
 Audio (including grade) did not discuss with peers as
much, due to audio being comprehensive
 Audio (delayed grade) discussed more with their peers

13.  Practical Creativity
 Realised the importance of need for logical and cohesive
flow to work from feedback
 Identified need to read more literature and compare and
contrast (different ways of doing this)
 Time management identified as an issue
 Audio group (delayed grade) noted the above more than
others, and they needed to work harder next time
 The ‘practical’ way of preparing to submit more evident
than ‘creativity’ in participants’ eyes

14.  Opportunity Awareness
 Additional prompts identified need to seek further help
with work (e.g. student support, literature searching,
accessing library, critical analysis). Audio groups felt
format allowed for greater expansion on these points
 Audio group (delayed grade) took opportunity to discuss
feedback with peers more then before, but did not see
this as ‘collaborative working’
 Audio format makes it more personalised, and therefore
more likely to act on opportunities available

15.  Strategic Thinking
 Identified need to plan more, as opposed to ‘Strategic
thinking’
 Action Orientation
 Many students had already acted upon the feedback
 Audio (delayed grade) seemed to be more active in
addressing feedback than other groups

16.  It can take longer…but….
 Recording average of audio-file took 4 minutes,
whereas typing sheet took 8!
 Not for everyone
 Be careful where you record and where it is played!
 Make notes
 More tech = more in-depth? (marker perspective)
 Content is more important than format

17.  Students consistently
evaluate audio files
positively in module
evaluations and Staff
Student Consultative
Committees
 Students have choice of
audio or written feedback
at the point of submission,
in addition to digital
annotation in one module.
 Assignment brief audio-
file available in most