Sometimes feedback on an assessment works best in person, where time is put aside to go through the material in detail, and to give the clarity and context of verbal explanations. While that’s not always been possible even in pre-pandemic times, a sense of the instructors’ presence as part of the feedback process is valuable, and there are a range of ways to make marking and feedback feel more like you are there in the room to explain, rather than rely on written comments and annotations alone.
There have been promising results in various projects using audio feedback with students (see, for example, Bob Rotherham’s Sounds Good project from 2009), and recently an increasing number of instructors have been using screen capturing (sometimes called “screen-casting”) software to produce detailed personalised feedback for students that they can watch – and re-watch – in their own time. Students have reported other benefits, such as finding the tutor’s tone of voice clarifies feedback, and that feedback seemed more balanced between positive and negative [1, 2]. Some instructors have reported that, once they’ve practised, that this enhanced form of feedback takes no longer than their more traditional methods .
Gabriele Paleari, Senior Lecturer in NTU’s University Language Programme, has taken this approach even further in using it for continuous formative assessment throughout his modules. His students have the option to submit their handwritten response to an activity on a weekly basis (although this method could work well for any type of submission), and Gabriele creates a video for each, talking through his annotations as he makes them. The iterative aspect allows him to give feedback that is not only highly personalised, but also takes into account the students’ progress through the module. While it’s still too early for collecting student evaluation data, the fact that many students choose to submit to this optional weekly activity is already an indication of how much the opportunity is valued.
When asked about his experience of creating the videos, Gabriele highlights the need for clear submission instructions for students to help streamline the feedback process, especially if it is to occur weekly: what file name they should give their submission, for instance, and whether they should submit their work double-spaced to give room for annotations. Privacy is also key, and Gabriele has worked with the LTSU to devise a method for ensuring that each student can only view the videos that relate to their own work.
If you’re a member of staff in Arts and Humanities at NTU, and you’re interested in trying out video feedback, the LTSU can offer advice on the different options available and help you to make sure the videos remain private. Get in touch with us at email@example.com.
 Jones, N., Georghiades, P. & Gunson, J. Student feedback via screen capture digital video: stimulating student’s modified action. Higher Education, 64, 593–607 (2012).
 Bissell, L. “Screen-casting as a Technology-enhanced Feedback Mode” Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, Volume 5, Issue 1, (2017).
 Vincelette, E.J. and Bostic, T. “Show and tell: Student and instructor perceptions of screencast assessment,” Assessing Writing, Volume 18, Issue 4. 257-277 (2013).