Feedback Practices with OLI

In my experience as an educator, the most used form of feedback I provide students with is generally written. While I do provide auditory feedback in person, written comments had always seemed to be a simpler method of responding back to student writing. However, in module five of this course, I explored how to provide feedback using two other methods: auditory and screencasts. By exploring these other options, I have further discovered the value of utilizing the resources afforded to me with the technology I already use on a daily basis.

For this module artifact, I used a previous paper submitted in one of my classes that were collaboratively written by two students. With auditory feedback, I thoroughly enjoyed commenting individually on specific areas of the paper that needed more revision, as well as spots that were well-developed and flowed smoothly. This method of feedback allowed me to focus less on grammatical issues that were surface-level. Most of my written feedback consisted of grammar-related revisions, which truly gave me more freedom to redirect myself back to my content-related commentary. While I thought the auditory feedback was a helpful tool to add to my practices, I worried about the accessibility of this form of feedback for students who may not learn via oral communication.

Of these three feedback methods, I was most intrigued by the screencasting method, which is the included artifact attached. Using this form, I was able to not only incorporate both my written and auditory feedback but a more interactive visual component was added through my ability to highlight and underline specific areas of the writing for students to see. As I went through the article, I referred back to my written feedback but also added my own commentary about different areas of the paper that could use some improvement. Personally, screencasting was my preferred practice by the end of module five because of its ability to instruct students through written, auditory, and visual feedback. Presently, I have been working on revising my instructional materials from the courses I teach to include explanations of how I will be providing feedback using these different approaches and the potential benefits behind them.

Considering how I would approach these methods differently, I plan to use another digital tool to complete my feedback instead of Microsoft Office or Google Docs. Instead, I would like to utilize Kami, which is an annotation tool that has built-in features like video and audio commenting, screen capturing, and text-to-speech capabilities. Kami includes an option for instructors to have students submit their assignments through the software, and this method would allow me to provide feedback using all the listed features above, as well as highlighting and underlining areas of their writing from within the resource.