東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

The Ecology of Feedback in an Online...

Rockey, Alexandria.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The Ecology of Feedback in an Online STEM Course.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The Ecology of Feedback in an Online STEM Course./
作者:	Rockey, Alexandria.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2020,
面頁冊數:	314 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-04, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International82-04A.
標題:	Educational technology. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=27994466
ISBN:	9798672163796

The Ecology of Feedback in an Online STEM Course.
Rockey, Alexandria.

The Ecology of Feedback in an Online STEM Course. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2020 - 314 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-04, Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Davis, 2020.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

This mixed-methods study uses an ecology of feedback model to holistically account for student and instructor perceptions of feedback. In the online course studied in this dissertation, mediating technologies were used to provide extensive feedback. To understand this ecology of feedback in Brewing Science, I collected feedback students received on their weekly writing assignments, conducted interviews with students, TAs, and the professor, collected course artifacts (including the rubric and assignment descriptions), and gathered responses to student surveys. To analyze this data, I used open and axial coding for interviews and open-ended responses on surveys, correlation analysis of survey responses, and content analysis to map the types of technologies through which feedback was provided. I also adapted Ferris et al.'s (1997) model to code the pragmatic intent and linguistic form of feedback to account for interface features. I then used this adapted model to code feedback students received on their weekly writing assignments.Findings indicate that feedback varied across quarters, across TAs, across points in the quarter, and between in-text and summative comments. Though the same technologies mediated feedback across quarters, instructors used technologies differently to provide feedback and students used technologies differently to access and apply feedback. Given the relationship between student perceptions of interaction and feedback discovered through analysis, the study points to the need for reenvisioning the affordances and constraints of online courses. In addition, student and instructor shared and contrasting perspectives on feedback also highlight how the affordances of automated feedback could be intentionally leveraged. As suggested by these findings, the embedded interface of SpeedGrader empowered students to ask for clarification, challenge feedback they perceived as harsh, and/or provide comments on how they revised using the feedback. In addition, automated feedback integrated into video lectures was highly valued by students. Students used a variety of strategies unique to online courses and tried and true strategies typical of face-to-face learning environments to leverage this automated feedback.Pedagogical implications are presented to guide instructors as they plan courses with an ecology of feedback in mind. Pedagogical implications highlight the importance of: (1) clearly communicating the purpose of feedback, (2) engaging in dialogue about feedback to promote meaningful interactions, and (3) reflecting on what feedback was underutilized by the students. At the end of this study, I call for future research to explore affordances unique to online courses. There are also possibilities for further research to explore student and instructor perceptions of feedback on student writing. Using the ecology of feedback model in a variety of institutions and courses could lead faculty and instructional designers to use mediating technologies more effectively.

ISBN: 9798672163796Subjects--Topical Terms:

517670
Educational technology.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Ecology of feedback

The Ecology of Feedback in an Online STEM Course.
LDR:04221nmm a2200385 4500 001 2279063
005 20210730131532.5
008 220723s2020 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9798672163796
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI27994466
035 $a AAI27994466
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Rockey, Alexandria. $3 3557476
245 1 4 $a The Ecology of Feedback in an Online STEM Course.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2020
300 $a 314 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-04, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Whithaus, Carl.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Davis, 2020.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a This mixed-methods study uses an ecology of feedback model to holistically account for student and instructor perceptions of feedback. In the online course studied in this dissertation, mediating technologies were used to provide extensive feedback. To understand this ecology of feedback in Brewing Science, I collected feedback students received on their weekly writing assignments, conducted interviews with students, TAs, and the professor, collected course artifacts (including the rubric and assignment descriptions), and gathered responses to student surveys. To analyze this data, I used open and axial coding for interviews and open-ended responses on surveys, correlation analysis of survey responses, and content analysis to map the types of technologies through which feedback was provided. I also adapted Ferris et al.'s (1997) model to code the pragmatic intent and linguistic form of feedback to account for interface features. I then used this adapted model to code feedback students received on their weekly writing assignments.Findings indicate that feedback varied across quarters, across TAs, across points in the quarter, and between in-text and summative comments. Though the same technologies mediated feedback across quarters, instructors used technologies differently to provide feedback and students used technologies differently to access and apply feedback. Given the relationship between student perceptions of interaction and feedback discovered through analysis, the study points to the need for reenvisioning the affordances and constraints of online courses. In addition, student and instructor shared and contrasting perspectives on feedback also highlight how the affordances of automated feedback could be intentionally leveraged. As suggested by these findings, the embedded interface of SpeedGrader empowered students to ask for clarification, challenge feedback they perceived as harsh, and/or provide comments on how they revised using the feedback. In addition, automated feedback integrated into video lectures was highly valued by students. Students used a variety of strategies unique to online courses and tried and true strategies typical of face-to-face learning environments to leverage this automated feedback.Pedagogical implications are presented to guide instructors as they plan courses with an ecology of feedback in mind. Pedagogical implications highlight the importance of: (1) clearly communicating the purpose of feedback, (2) engaging in dialogue about feedback to promote meaningful interactions, and (3) reflecting on what feedback was underutilized by the students. At the end of this study, I call for future research to explore affordances unique to online courses. There are also possibilities for further research to explore student and instructor perceptions of feedback on student writing. Using the ecology of feedback model in a variety of institutions and courses could lead faculty and instructional designers to use mediating technologies more effectively.
590 $a School code: 0029.
650 4 $a Educational technology. $3 517670
650 4 $a Instructional design. $3 3172279
650 4 $a Science education. $3 521340
653 $a Ecology of feedback
653 $a Feedback
653 $a Interaction
653 $a Online education
653 $a Writing across the curriculum
653 $a Writing in the disciplines
690 $a 0710
690 $a 0447
690 $a 0714
710 2 $a University of California, Davis. $b Education. $3 1037322
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 82-04A.
790 $a 0029
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2020
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=27994466