Effective Feedback Methods for Online Teachers

Students and instructors are influencing education as they enroll in and teach online courses. We are seeing successes with online learning, but the methods are continually being evaluated to provide sound learning based on pedagogical and andragogical learning theories. Students indicate that teacher feedback is one of the important aspects to successful eLearning (Getzalf, Perry, Toffner, Lamarche, & Edwards, 2009). As teacher-student interaction is online, it requires further investigation for successful teacher feedback and student satisfaction. Face-to-face interaction is replaced by methods that have the potential to be just as effective, if not more so when compared to large, over-sized traditional classrooms at large universities. Feedback online is more than an end of the course survey, which tends to be one-sided, with information to be used by the instructor alone. Online courses must replace all the nuances of face-to-face learning with comparable solutions. Teachers cannot look at their audience to judge interaction, or answer questions fielded during a class. But research is uncovering methods that contribute to student satisfaction and success.

Quality online feedback may be more time-consuming, especially compared to institutions of higher education where many professors are accustomed to lecturing in large classrooms and providing Teacher Assistants to handle student questions. Smaller class size is more conducive to teacher-student interaction, and some online courses may be able to maintain this, but more often online courses enroll more students. Effective instructors must spend time responding to students' questions about assignments and course materials, as well as give feedback on their student’s work (Gallien & Oomen-Early, 2008).  The asynchronous learning environment presents new opportunities for making these connections successful while subscribing to sound theories of online learning (Espasa & Meneses, 2009).  

Even if it requires more time, the ease at responding from any location, at any time presents advantages over the traditional office hours.  Nevertheless, the size of the class, whether online or offline will determine the ability of instructors to meet those needs.  Overall, a teacher must consider timeliness with all feedback methods, as students online can create questions at all hours, and thus teachers must organize their time to include addressing these needs. In the spirit of collaborative learning, teachers who enjoy their work of teaching and assisting learners, will be eager to improve their own strategies to facilitate better outcomes within the eLearning community.

Teacher feedback can be addressed in a number of ways:  

Emails:  

Any venue, business, personal, or educational values the timeliness of answered emails.  In online courses it is essential for instructors to encourage and respond to emails from their students, thus supporting constructivist learning theory (Anderson, Imdieke, & Standerford, 2011).  Students have previous knowledge in many areas, but they need feedback to ensure that they are on the right path. Teachers in a face-to-face scenario can receive cues from their students during a discussion, signaling understanding or confusion. This does not happen online, and students rarely email or post questions according to a study by Anderson, et. al (2011). Teachers should inform students that they will answer emails within a certain timeframe, thus increasing a sense of order and engagement. A timely response shows enthusiasm in the subject and the process of learning, which indicates that a teacher loves their vocation (Anderson, et. al, 2011).  Students sense this and know which of their instructors love to teach and are more effective teachers (Anderson, et. al, 2011). This will require a consistent method of checking emails and responding to students questions or concerns. 

Online Presence:  

Teachers contribute feedback in other ways besides email. Discussion boards are often set-up for student interaction, but teachers have the responsibility to monitor and add to those discussions.  One teacher found a way to provide feedback by searching the postings, where she was able to read between the lines and look for a student's needs, adding clarity, new resources, or stretching student’s thinking (Anderson, et. al, 2011).  A teacher’s presence online further creates opportunities for connecting and building upon constructivist learning theory. A silent instructor shows disinterest and does not contribute to the learning process, signaling this lack of concern to the students.

The nature of asynchronous learning provides the opportunity for continual dialogue at any time of the day or location.  This increases the potential for collaborative learning, where students and teachers contribute ideas based on previous knowledge, and further provides for a constructivist-learning environment (Haythornthwaite & Andrews, 2011).  This feedback goes both ways -- for students and instructors. Teachers benefit from feedback and good teachers thrive on the need to receive affirming feedback (Anderson, et. al, 2011).  By becoming active online, teachers are better able to modify their methods and thus find satisfaction as a teacher. Students benefit as well, and the exchange of information and the building of new knowledge constructs learning environments.  

Feedback during a course is a continual formative assessment which can address doubts and questions about the subject matter (Espasa & Meneses, 2009).  In their study, Espasa & Meneses (2009) reported that this type of ongoing feedback was used the most and consisted in teachers conveying how to improve work and increase learning.  In another study of an online computer-programming course, Ebrahimi (2012), found that early feedback reduced student errors and inefficient problem solving methods.  Students had unlimited access to the instructor and classmates, stimulating a collaborative environment, which resulted in students using less trial-and-error methods to solve problems.  This reduced time and frustration, but it also impacted creativity and  error-detection capabilities which could effect overall learning (Ebrahimi, 2012). The subject matter of an online course will need to play a role in deciding the type of feedback for optimal learning.

Graded Assignments:  

Instructors are often assessed by the grades they give. But, students are also cognizant of whether a teacher loved the subject and enjoyed sharing the knowledge. While it is important not to devalue the methods of analyzing if a student has gained the required knowledge, many students have a desire to learn (especially within their major interest).  Anderson, et. al (2011), noted that students frequently included feedback with their assignments, explaining how it went for them and why it might have been difficult for them.  This was helpful to the teacher who then analyzed the learning module and considered alterations. A learning theory of connectivism supports this type of feedback, as well as the theory of constructivism, building upon information in a community and co-constructing.  The process of encouraging feedback from students throughout the course, either in graded assignments or discussions, is a valuable resource in designing eLearning courses (Espasa & Meneses, 2009). Formative learning assessment is a continual feedback that leads students to move from needing more direction to becoming autonomous (Espasa & Meneses, 2009). This can take place after a graded assignment and to be an effective formative assessment should include advise to improve learning as well as correct answers and a grade.  However, in the study by Espasa & Meneses (2009), this type of graded assignment feedback did not include teacher information to improve learning, yet concluded that the relationship between feedback and learning was positive indicated by final grades and students’ satisfaction.

Personalized feedback versus collective feedback:

Although this should seem obvious, students preferred personal feedback from the instructor and actually did better academically than students receiving collective feedback (Gallien & Oomen-Early, 2008).  In this study, the students further reported qualitatively that they were more satisfied by the availability of the instructor to respond in a timely manner than the feedback they received on assignments (Gallien & Oomen-Early, 2008). 

Content and Process of Feedback:

Teacher feedback prompts students to assess their existing knowledge, analyze what they have learned, and reflect on what they still need to learn (Getzalf, et. al, 2009).  In a descriptive, exploratory study, Getzalf, et. al (2009), studied graduate students’ perceptions of effective online feedback. Content and process of feedback was examined to reveal five major themes as described in the table below: 

Theme	Summary
Student Involvement and Individuation	Effective feedback is a mutual process involving both student and instructor.
Being Positively Constructive	Effective feedback provides constructive guidance that builds confidence
Gentle Guidance	Effective feedback guides through explicit expectations and ongoing coaching
Timeliness	Timelines for effective feedback are mutually established and met.
Future Orientation	Effective feedback is applicable to future situations

(Getzalf, Perry, Toffner, Lamarche, & Edwards, 2009)

Effective feedback for online courses is still being studied to ensure successful outcomes (Getzalf, et. al, 2009). Both teachers and students play an important role in ensuring that feedback is mutual, constructive, ongoing, timely, and applicable to future situations (Getzalf, et. al, 2009). Interested teachers will adopt these upcoming methods and cooperate with researchers who will continue to fine tune the process of learning online around theories of learning that support constructivism, collaboration and connectivism. New methods of feedback may continually unfold as technology increases. Hopefully, providing effective feedback will become second nature to those who teach within the eLearning community.

References

Anderson, D., Imdieke, S., & Standerford, N. S. (2011). Feedback please: Studying self in the online classroom. International Journal of Instruction, 4(1), 3-15. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=69726556&site=eds-live

Ebrahimi, A. (2011). How does early feedback in an online programming course change problem solving? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 40(4), 371-379. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=79629576&site=eds-live

Espasa, A., & Meneses, J. (2010). Analysing feedback processes in an online teaching and learning environment: An exploratory study. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 59(3), 277-292. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ872788&site=eds-live;http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9247-4

Gallien, T., & Oomen-Early, J. (2008). Personalized versus collective instructor feedback in the online courseroom: Does type of feedback affect student satisfaction, academic performance and perceived connectedness with the instructor? International Journal on E-Learning, 7(3), 463-476. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspxdirect=true&db=ehh&AN=33019006&site=eds-live

Getzlaf, B., Perry, B., Toffner, G., Lamarche, K., & Edwards, M. (2009). Effective instructor feedback: Perceptions of online graduate students. Journal of Educators Online, 6(2)  Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ904070&site=eds-live

Haythornthwaite, C., & Andrews, R. (2011) E-learning Theory & Practice. London: Sage

Course Design: Embedding Technology in a Lesson

An effective eLearning course or lesson must be based on theories of online instructional design and technologies that will ensure successful outcomes. However, educators that are actively teaching do not always have the time to evaluate theories for eLearning. Furthermore, those who design courses for online learning may not have an understanding of current theories that support effective eLearning  (Hirumi, 2012). New instructional design theories specific for Internet learning may continually emerge (Synder, 2009).

Technology in itself does not promote learning, but it is an integral part of developing effective elearning based on learning theories. The ultimate goal of any online course is to affect a change of growth and development and learning theories are about how people learn (Wang, 2012).  When this happens through the use of technology and the Internet, old learning frameworks have the potential to meld with new emerging learning theories. Online instructors and designers must continually evaluate these theories if they wish to reap the results of effective eLearning. This is especially true as new online courses are continually being added to institutions of higher learner as well as the many massive open online courses.

However, it is easy for instructors and learners to become overwhelmed by the number of learning theories and how best to use them, even when they understand that theories advance practice (Wang, 2012). "Educators and scholars should unite theories with practice," as stipulated in Eastern thought (Wang, 2012, p. 9).

The online course that I am proposing is a subject that I am not yet proficient, but anxious to understand -- Learning theory for online learners. I am proposing a course for those who need to design effective eLearning courses based on sound eLearning theories, the framework that supports successful online learning.  The engine of delivery for online courses is the Internet and technology, but the framework of the course is instructional learning theory. 

The ASSURE lesson plan provides a template for selecting technology as part of the design, using the acronym, Analyze learners, State standards and objectives, Select strategies, technology, media, and materials, Utilize the media and materials, Require the learners to participate, and Evaluate the effectiveness of the lesson (Free CSS Templates, 2012). This is not a learning theory, but a template for implementing a learning theory.

The first task of designing a course or lesson, based on a theoretical framework is to determine the specific learning community, their prior knowledge, experience, and preferences (Mohanna & Waters, 2008). The targeted learners in this case are those who have a desire to create effective elearning courses based on learning theory. This could be the graduate student like myself, the teacher of a traditional school who must offer an online course, or business associates designing in-house training. Within these groups are those with varying degrees of knowledge, from novice to expert.  

The proposed lesson will be based on a learning environment that is asynchronous, available at the discretion of the adult student. Activities will include linked readings, video and slide presentations, and discussion forums, to address the varied preferences of learning styles and the ASSURE template (Free CSS Templates, 2012).  All of these activities will be embedded in the virtual learning classroom.

The theoretical framework for a course is the next aim, considering the audience and learning environment (Haythornthwaite & Andrews, 2011). It is good practice to try to align theory and practice by looking at the research on human learning (Hirumi, 2012). The course designer must decide on a learning theory and use strategies, tools and techniques that implement the desired learning objectives within that framework (Hirumi, 2012).

As theory can sometimes be complicated, involving a range of thoughts, and emerging as new theories in the field of elearning, it is important to provide this information in as many formats as possible, yet be clear and understandable. The ultimate goal is to improve the success of online courses through the use of theoretical frameworks, and therefore it is important that those who are designing these courses gain an understanding of learning theory and its application. For example, novices need courses based on learning theories that differ from experts because novices use a working backwards approach to problem solving while experts use a working forwards approach (Mohanna, et. al, 2008).  Cognitivist learning theory may overlap with constructivist theory, as novice progresses to expert. An effective course would address both of these learners, or provide a beginning course and an intermediate one.

Embedded technology fulfills the need for learners to absorb information, and can address various modes of reading, listening, watching, discussing (Horton, 2011).

A Proposed Lesson Plan with Embedded Technology: Understanding Learning Theories for eLearning Design

Adult learning theory:  Andragogy

1.  Read:  

• Moving From Pedagogy to Andragogy
• Adult Learning Theory and Principles          
• Pedagogy versus Andragogy          
• Andragogy and Pedagogy

2.  Watch Two  Videos:  

3.  Discussion Forum:  Share your thoughts about andragogy versus pedagogy or pedagogy leading to andragogy.

Theories of Instructional Design:

1.  View:

Theories Of Instructional Design from Jordan Carswell

2.   Read:

• Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism
• Instructional Design Knowledge Base
• Constructivism
• Instructional Design Model for eLearning

3.  Watch:

• Cognitive Load Theory

4.  View:

(Hirumi, 2012)

5.  Discussion Forum:  Share thoughts on learning theories. 

References  

Free CSS Templates.  (2012).  Learning Modules: ASSURE Model-based lesson plan.  Retrieved from http://thanomsing.com/courses/sp11/modules/design/assure_model.htm 

Haythornthwaite, C., & Andrews, R. (2011).  E-learning Theory and Practice. London, England: Sage.

Horton, W. (2011). E-Learning by Design. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

Hirumi, A. (2012). The design and sequencing of online and blended learning interactions: A framework for grounded design. Canadian Learning Journal, 16(2), 21-25. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=79461798&site=eds-live

Makki, B., & Makki, B. (2012). The impact of integration of instructional systems technology into research and educational technology. Creative Education, 3(2), 275-280. Retrieved from  http://www.doaj.org/doajfunc=openurl&genre=article&issn=21514755&date=2012&volume=03&issue=02&spage=275

Mohanna, K. & Waters, M. (2008). Multiple perspectives on learning: But which way for instructional  design? Education for Primary Care, 19, 563-568. Retrieved from http://proxy1.ncu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=35156501&site=eds-live

Snyder, M. M. (2009). Instructional-design theory to guide the creation of online learning communities for adults. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 53(1), 48-56. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspxdirect=true&db=eric&AN=EJ838556&site=eds-live; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-009-0237-2

Wang, V. C. X. 1., vcxwang@gmail.com. (2012). Understanding and promoting learning theories. International Forum of Teaching & Studies, 8(2), 5-11. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ofs&AN=82187857&site=eds-live

Analyze your learning style

Teachers and course designers have the task of meeting the learning styles of students in hopes of creating successful learning environments (Romanelli, Bird, & Ryan, 2009). Some students may understand concepts visually, some kinesthetically, while others have acute auditory skills (Felder, 2010).  Often, teachers suggest that students take personality tests that indicate a type of learning style. While this may help learners as they tackle their studies, it is more likely a type of personality trait (Romanelli, et. al, 2009). 

Studies have been divided on the usefulness of matching learning styles with teaching methodologies. O’Leary and Stewart (2013) found greater success when the teaching methods matched the passive or active learning styles (as described by Kolb) of accounting students. However, another study found no significance when matching teaching styles with students’ learning styles (Dincol, Temel, Oskay, Erdogan, & Yilmaz, 2011). However, underachievers may benefit from the results of determining their learning style or modality (Lister & Ansalone, 2006).

As eLearning becomes global, learning styles that have been identified in the Western culture may not be conclusive in all cultures (Eaves, 2011). Metacognitive learning styles are not the only factors leading to successful educational outcomes, but other influences such as culture and second language will have a bearing (Eaves, 2011). The learning styles of online learners were evaluated in a study, which found that students’ styles correlated with learning materials (DaGhan & Akkoyunlu, 2012). Visual learners preferred visual materials; auditory learners preferred auditory, and kinesthetic learners preferred the kinesthetic materials as determined by the Maggie McVay Lynch Learning Style Inventory (DaGhan, et. al, 2012).

While it may be helpful for students to understand their learning style and use those strengths in their studies, it may not be the key to success in any one course. However, it may help students understand why they do not like a particular teaching style or relate well to a teacher who has the opposite learning style. If students and teachers acknowledge these differences and if teachers try to develop practices that cover a broad spectrum of styles, there may be more successful outcomes. 

When surveying effective teaching methods across the learning styles, I have yet to take a course where the teacher covers all the alternatives – for example, being critical and expressing pleasure to meet the needs of both “feelers” and “thinkers.” (PLSI, 2004). When I took the learning style test offered at Paragon Learning Inventory (PLSI, 2004), I realized it was the Myers-Briggs personality test, which I have taken before. The results were the same, as it informed me of being the INFJ type personality. However, when I took a few more tests, the results varied between INFJ and INTJ. This categorization of my learning style or personality confirmed my dislike of group projects for one, and confirmed other sides of my personality as well. 

However, I tend to believe that a variety of "absorb activities" as explained by Horton (2011) that include visual, tactile, and hearing are helpful for all learning styles. If a course designer or teacher
implements absorb, do and connect activities that address learning theories specific to a group of learners, there should be enough variation to meet the needs of all learning styles (Horton, 2011).

Students will always have to take courses and meet the demands of those courses, whether or not they use materials that coincide with their learning styles. Learning styles may indicate how students approach their studies, and why they respond better to different teaching methods (Wilson, 2012).  This information may be helpful to both students and instructors even though the validity of learning styles is questioned as being more an indicator of personality rather than learning style (Romanelli, et. al, 2009).  Some tests based on Carl Jung and Briggs Myers personality assessments stretch the meanings and results to include information that almost verges on horoscope-like advice, even directing students to appropriate careers (Humanmetrics, 2013).

For this activity, students will take the following learning style assessments:

#1  http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.html

#2  http://www.personalitypathways.com/type_inventory.html#Inventory

#3  http://kisa.ca/personality/

#4  http://www.mypersonality.info/personality-types/
#5  http://www.educationplanner.org/students/self-assessments/learning-styles.shtml

Then read the meaning of the scores:  

#1  http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSdir/styles.htm

#2  http://www.typelogic.com/

Effective teaching across the learning styles: 

http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/jshindl/plsi/teaching.htm

References

DaGhan, G., & Akkoyunlu, B. (2012). An examination through conjoint analysis of the preferences of students concerning online learning environments according to their learning styles. International Education Studies, 5(4), 122-138. doi:10.5539/ies.v5n4p122

Eaves, M. (2011). The relevance of learning styles for international pedagogy in higher education. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 17(6), 677-691. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ949132&site=eds-live; http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13540602.2011.625143

Felder, R. (2010). Learning Styles and Strategies. Retrieved from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/ILSdir/styles.htm

Horton, W. (2011). E-Learning by Design. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

Lister, D., & Ansalone, G. (2006). Utilizing modality theory to achieve academic success. (undetermined). Educational Research Quarterly, 30(2), 19-29. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ofs&AN=507935123&site=eds-live

O'Leary, C., c.oleary@griffith.edu.au, & Stewart, J., j.stewart@griffith.edu.au. (2013). The interaction of learning styles and teaching methodologies in accounting ethical instruction. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(2), 225-241. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1291-9

Paragon Learning Style. (2004). Retrieved from http://www.calstatela.edu/faculty/jshindl/plsi/

Romanelli, F, Bird, E., and Ryan, M. (2009). Learning Styles: A Review of Theory, Application, and Best Practices. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(1). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2690881/

Sinem Dinçol, Temel, S., Özge Ö. Oskay, Ümit I. Erdoğan, & Ayhan Yılmaz.The effect of matching learning styles with teaching styles on success Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.198

Wilson, M. (2012). Students' learning style preferences and teachers' instructional strategies: Correlations between matched styles and academic achievement. SRATE Journal, 22(1), 36-44. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ995172&site=eds-live