Video-based feedback on student assessment: scarily personal | Henderson | Australasian Journal of Educational Technology

Video-based feedback on student assessment: scarily personal

Sourced through from:

Definitely worth the read even if you have get past  faux objective nonsense like this: "…

experienced, if not joy, at least a sense of purposeful enthusiasm and curious anticipation. "  Was looking forward to how they were defining feed forward, but nary a word defining it.  


Especially like how they categorized the video responses from "salutation" to "valediction".  Here are the rest:



Conversational/informal salutation: “Hi Lee” 

Relational work 

Recognition and valuing of the student including personal circumstance and history. This both draws on and reinforces the pedagogical relationship between teacher and student. This might include a sympathetic comment (e.g., “I know you have been quite ill lately and I am truly impressed that …”), appreciation of effort of previous drafts (e.g., “I can see you have made a lot of changes to your introduction”), reaction to quality or other aspect of submission (e.g., “Thank you for submitting … I can see how much effort …”). 

Evaluative summary 

General statement of evaluation, not necessarily the grade or mark. Very few of the videos specifically stated the grade, which was indicated to the students before they opened the video. A general evaluative statement here provided a chance to highlight the overall strength and weakness of the assignment before dealing with the more specific issues. For instance, “The essay is very strong in its theoretical approach… need work in …” and “I thoroughly enjoyed … but there are some issues we need to talk about, namely …” 

Textual issues 

Briefly describing the nature, patterns and extent of textual issues (e.g., grammar, punctuation, flow, formatting) in this assignment, occasionally with one or two specific examples. This segment of the feedback is short but generally included the same volume of comments about textual issues as the final evaluative notes in the text-based feedback (but not the specificity of the in-text edits). 

Commenting on the substance of the assignment with an emphasis on feed forward. 

Engaging with the conclusions, arguments, logic, justification, and literature included in the assignment. Commenting on strengths, weaknesses, flaws, gaps, creativity and insights. Importantly, comments were phrased to emphasise how students can improve their grades in future work and how they can extend their thinking about the substance of the assignment. This might include examples of alternative arguments, additional literature and different ways to think or approach the topic. Usually 2 to 3 issues were discussed in detail, regardless of result. 

Valediction and invitation 

This is largely relational work. Usually involving use of student name, coupled with congratulations or commiseration over result or other interpersonal validation, such as, best wishes for future studies / holiday. 

Importantly, this structural component included an invitation to contact the lecturer to “continue the discussion” of this feedback and future work. 

See on Scoop.itTech Pedagogy

One thought on “Video-based feedback on student assessment: scarily personal | Henderson | Australasian Journal of Educational Technology

  1. Technology makes it so easy to do this from a technical standpoint. It will be interesting to see what we can do with it given its many relational components. We have been encouraged to use audio feedback and I just haven’t done it yet for logistical reasons.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *