Learning Across Sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices - Earli

For EARLI members only.
Not for onward distribution.
Productive e- feedback in higher education 247
Some critical issues emerging from the literature
Most of the research studies on e- feedback report advantages over traditional
feedback, particularly related to peer involvement. There are, however, a number
of critical issues arising from the literature. Peer feedback has long been seen as a
way of introducing a dialogic model of feedback, giving more control and agency
to students, instead of passive reliance on teacher feedback to fix their writing
(Freedman & Sperling, 1985). Several studies show, however, that students are
selective about using peer feedback. Connor and Asenavage (1994) claimed that
peer feedback made only a marginal difference to student writing. Zhang’s (1995)
study showed that 75 per cent of 81 college freshmen preferred teacher feedback,
and that they trusted teachers as experts but were reluctant to trust their peers.
Hyland (2000) also found that students had problems providing quality feedback.
Jacobs et al. (1998) argue, however, that asking students to choose between teacher
and peer feedback is misleading, as they supplement one another. Research also
indicates that careful preparation and training in peer response increases the quality
and usefulness of peer comments (Sluijsmans, 2002; Zhang, 1995). Training
is also likely to benefit student reviewers and make them more critical evaluators
of their own texts (Ferris, 2004). Crook, Gross and Dymott (2006) found that
students were very vulnerable to e- feedback. Written feedback, given electronically
is sensitive to the possibility of misinterpretation due to the lack of synchrony that
allows one to modulate and moderate what is said and this must be conveyed in
any training.
Concerns have also been raised about the disadvantage of relying on e- feedback
for less technologically savvy students. Lindblom- Ylänne and Pihlajamäki (2003)
found, for instance, that Finnish students did not like to share drafts with peers in
this way. This is confirmed in a study by Blignaut and Lillejord (2006) of students
in the South African region. Not surprisingly, a series of studies have shown that
e- feedback works best when integrated into the curriculum (Hyland & Hyland,
2006, p. 94). In our own study we document how e- feedback is integrated into
the whole teaching- learning environment.
Theoretical perspectives
Our two university sites exhibit varying degrees of online community building and
varying degrees of student ownership of texts, issues identified in the literature
as crucial to feedback processes. We introduce, however, new issues that so far
have received little attention, such as how students are enculturated into diverse
disciplinary communities and the importance of disagreement in productive learning.
Our theoretical perspective is particularly relevant for these issues. In light of
sociocultural theory, feedback can only be understood in its cultural context. The
theoretical basis of the teaching- learning regime needs to be explored as well as the
implications of disciplinary cultures. We will therefore look at the epistemological
foundation of the ‘authoritative’ and the ‘dialogic’ model of feedback.