Aller directement au menu principal Aller directement au contenu principal Aller au pied de page
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Articles

Vol. 26 No. 1 (2023)

Teachers’ Perceptions Toward Video as a Tool for Feedback on Students’ Oral Performance

DOI
https://doi.org/10.37213/cjal.2023.32829
Soumise
avril 13, 2022
Publié-e
2023-03-15

Résumé

La technologie vidéo a le potentiel d'améliorer les possibilités d’offrir aux étudiants des rétroactions essentielles à leur apprentissage. Cependant, les études précédentes ont toutes porté sur des vidéos d’enseignants, plutôt que sur des vidéos de prestations d’étudiants. L’objet de cette étude est d’établir si la technologie vidéo contribue à améliorer la qualité des commentaires sur les prestations orales des étudiants et comment les professeurs de langues perçoivent les nouvelles technologies en ce qui concerne la formation des étudiants. Les participants à l'étude étaient huit professeurs de langues titulaires. Les résultats des entrevues ont indiqué que ces enseignants semblaient être très favorables à l'utilisation de la technologie vidéo comme outil de rétroaction. La technologie permettait non seulement d’établir des comptes-rendus factuels servant à enrichir la qualité des commentaires, mais elle leur permettait également de mettre en évidence des aspects spécifiques des prestations orales et de créer des commentaires propices à la compréhension. Les résultats de cette étude ont montré que la rétroaction basée sur des preuves et améliorée par la technologie sera en mesure de fournir un complément important à la rétroaction écrite, ajoutant un mode supplémentaire pour un processus de rétroaction efficace.

Références

  1. Abdous, M. H., & Yoshimura, M. (2010). Learner outcomes and satisfaction: A comparison of live video-streamed instruction, satellite broadcast instruction, and face-to-face instruction. Computers & Education, 55, 733-741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.006
  2. Abrahamson, E. (2010). Assessment through video-feedback on an undergraduate sports rehabilitation programme. Higher Education Academy [HEA] Case Study.
  3. Almurashi, W. A. (2016). The effective use of YouTube videos for teaching English language in classrooms as supplementary material at Taibah University in Alula. International Journal of English Language Linguistics Research, 4(3), 32-47.
  4. Alwehaibi, H. O. (2015). The impact of using Youtube in EFL classroom on enhancing EFL students' content learning. Journal of College Teaching, 12(2), 121-126.
  5. Amiri, A., Wang, J., Slater, N. K. H., & Najdanovic-Visak, V. (2021). Enhancement of process modelling and simulation evaluation by deploying a test for assessment and feedback individualisation. Education for Chemical Engineers, 35, 29-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2021.01.001
  6. Ardiansyah, L. (2018). Using videos in the teaching of listening. Jurnal Ilmiah Mandala Education, 4(1), 290. https://doi.org/10.36312/jime.v4i1.552
  7. Bao, W. (2020). COVID‐19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(2), 113-115.
  8. Bertolo-Pardo, E., Jones, P., & Carlton, K. (2012). Feedback and feed forward: Using video podcast to provide student feedback on past examinations and as revision aids. Higher Education Academy STEM Annual Conference 2012.
  9. Bitchener, J. (2012). Written corrective feedback for L2 development: Current knowledge and future research. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 855–860. https://doi.org/DOI:10.1002/tesq.62.
  10. Bitchener, J., & Ferris, D. R. (2012). Written corrective feedback in second language acquisition and writing. Routledge.
  11. Bracher, M., Collier, R., Ottewill, R., & Shepard, K. (2005). Accessing and engaging with video streams for educational purposes: Experiences, issues and concerns. Research in Learning Technology, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v13i2.10990
  12. Brick, B., & Holmes, J. (2008). Using screen capture software for student feedback: Towards a methodology. Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age (CELDA 2008) (pp. 339-342). IADIS Press. https://www.iadisportal.org/digital-library/using-screen-capture-software-for-student-feedback-towards-a-methodology
  13. Brown, S., & Knight, P. (1994). Assessing learners in higher education. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203062036
  14. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  15. Campbell, T. (1997). Technology, multimedia, and qualitative research in education. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30(2), 122-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/08886504.1997.10782219
  16. Canale, G. (2019). Technology, multimodality and learning: Analyzing meaning across scales. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21795-2
  17. Cann, A. (2014). Engaging students with audio feedback. Bioscience Education, 22(1), 31-41. https://doi.org/10.11120/beej.2014.00027
  18. Cann, A. J. (2007). Podcasting is dead. Long live video! Bioscience Education, 10(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.3108/beej.10.c1
  19. Çelik, S., Baran, E., & Sert, O. (2018). The affordances of mobile-app supported teacher observations for peer feedback. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL), 10(2), 36-49.
  20. Crook, A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson, C., Drinkwater, R., Lundqvist, K., Orsmond, P., Gomez, S., & Park, J. (2012). The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students? Computers & Education, 58(1), 386-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.025
  21. Debuse, J., Lawley, M., & Shibl, R. (2007). The implementation of an automated assessment feedback and quality assurance system for ICT courses. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(4), 491-502.
  22. Dunlop, M. (2017). Maximizing feedback for language learning: English language learners' attention, affect, cognition and usage of computer-delivered feedback from an English language reading proficiency assessment [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Toronto. https://hdl.handle.net/1807/78966
  23. El-Dib, M. A. B. (2007). Levels of reflection in action research. An overview and an assessment tool. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(1), 24-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.002
  24. Erlingsson, C., & Brysiewicz, P. (2017). A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. African Journal of Emergency Medicine, 7(3), 93-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2017.08.001
  25. Felix, U. (2005). Analyzing recent CALL effectiveness research: Towards a common agenda. Computer-Assisted Language Learning, 18(1-2), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220500132274
  26. Ferris, D. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(32), 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990490
  27. Flor, M., & Futagi, Y. (2012). On using context for automatic correction of non-word misspellings in student essays. [Conference presentation]. The 7th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA), Montréal, Canada.
  28. Gunada, I. S., & Wayan, I. (2017). Using YouTube video: An IT-based media to improve students’ speaking skill. [Unpublished manuscript]. Department of English Language Education, Ganesha University of Education.
  29. Harris, L. R., Brown, G. T., & Harnett, J. A. (2014). Understanding classroom feedback practices: A study of New Zealand student experiences, perceptions, and emotional responses. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26(2), 107-133. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-013-9187-5
  30. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  31. Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1).
  32. Hennessy, C., & Forrester, G. (2014). Developing a framework for effective audio feedback: a case study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(7), 777-789.
  33. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
  34. Huang, H.-T. D., & Hung, S.-T. A. (2013). Exploring the utility of a video-based online EFL discussion forum. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3).
  35. Irons, A. (2007). Enhancing learning through formative assessment and feedback. Routledge.
  36. Körkkö, M., Kyrö-Ämmälä, O., & Turunen, T. (2022). VEO as part of reflective practice in the primary teacher education programme in Finland. In P. Seedhouse (Ed.), Video enhanced observation for language teaching: Reflection and professional Development (pp. 83-96). Bloomsbury Academic. http://doi.org/10.5040/9781350085060.ch-6
  37. Körkkö, M., Morales Rios, S., & Kyrö-Ämmälä, O. (2019). Using a video app as a tool for reflective practice. Educational Research, 61(1), 22-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2018.1562954
  38. Lavolette, E., Polio, C., & Kahng, J. (2015). The accuracy of computer-assisted feedback and students’ responses to it. Language Learning & Technology, 19(2), 50-68. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44417
  39. Lipnevich, A., & Smith, J. (Eds.). (2018). The Cambridge handbook of instructional feedback. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316832134
  40. Liu, M., Moore, Z., Graham, L., & Lee, S. (2002). A look at the research in computer-based technology use in second language learning: A review of literature from 1990–2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 250–273.
  41. Lunt, T., & Curran, J. (2010). ‘Are you listening please?’ The advantages of electronic audio feedback compared to written feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 759-769. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902977772
  42. Lyster, R., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). A response to Truscott’s “What’s wrong with oral grammar correction.” Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 457.
  43. Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 471-497. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004010
  44. Mann, S., & Walsh, S. (2017). Reflective practice in English language teaching: Research-based principles and practices. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315733395
  45. Marriott, P., & Teoh, L. K. (2012). Using screencasts to enhance assessment feedback: Students’ perceptions and preferences. Accounting Education, 21(6), 583-598.
  46. Martínez-Arboleda, A. (2018). Audiovisual student feedback (ASF) in higher education: Teaching and power. The International Journal of E-Learning and Educational Technologies in the Digital Media (IJEETDM), 4(4), 98-113.
  47. Mathisen, P. (2012). Video feedback in higher education: A contribution to improving the quality of written feedback. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 7(2), 97-116.
  48. Mayer, R. (Ed.). (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816819
  49. McCarthy, J. (2015). Evaluating written, audio and video feedback in higher education summative assessment tasks. Issues in Educational Research, 25(2), 153-169.
  50. McLaughlin, P., Kerr, W., & Howie, K. (2007). Fuller, richer feedback, more easily delivered, using tablet PCs. Proceedings for the 11th International Conference on Computer Aided Assessment.
  51. Michael, H., & Michael, P. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1878
  52. Miller, P., & Haines, J. (2022). From teaching to learning: The development of the VEO App. In P. Seedhouse (Ed.), Video enhanced observation for language teaching: Reflection and professional development (pp. 21-38). Bloomsbury Academic. http://doi.org/10.5040/9781350085060.ch-3
  53. Munshi, C., & Deneen, C. (2018). Technology-enhanced feedback. In A. Lipnevich & E. Panadero (Eds.), A review of feedback models and theories: Descriptions, definitions, and conclusions (pp. 335-356). Cambridge University Press.
  54. Nassaji, H., & Kartchava, E. (2017). Corrective feedback in second language teaching and learning: Research, theory, applications, implications. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315621432
  55. Orsmond, P., & Merry, S. (2011). Feedback alignment: Effective and ineffective links between tutors' and students' understanding of coursework feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36, 125-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903201651
  56. Oxford, R., Park-Oh, Y., It, S., & Sumrall, M. (1993). Japanese by satellite: Effects of motivation, language learning styles and strategies, gender, course level, and previous language learning experience on Japanese language achievement. Foreign Language Annals, 26(3), 359-371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1993.tb02292.x
  57. Phillips, M., Henderson, M., & Ryan, T. (2016). Multimodal feedback is not always clearer, more useful or satisfying. Show Me The Learning. Proceedings ASCILITE, 514-522.
  58. Pisarenko, V. (2017). Teaching a foreign language using videos. Social Sciences, 6, 125. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci6040125
  59. Prensky, M. (2005). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Gifted, (135), 29-31.
  60. Rahmatian, R., & Armiun, N. (2011). The effectiveness of audio and video documents in developing listening comprehension skill in a foreign language. International Journal of English Linguistics, 1(1), 290-304. http://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v1n1p115
  61. Ranalli, J., Link, S., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2017). Automated writing evaluation for formative assessment of second language writing: Investigating the accuracy and usefulness of feedback as part of argument-based validation. Educational Psychology, 37(1), 8-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1136407
  62. Sauro, S. (2009). Computer-mediated corrective feedback and the development of L2 grammar. Languge Learning & Technology, 31(1), 96-120.
  63. Schmidt, J., Fleming, J., Ownsworth, T., & Lannin, N. A. (2013). Video feedback on functional task performance improves self-awareness after traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabilitation and neural repair, 27(4), 316-324. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968312469838
  64. Seedhouse, P. (2022). Video enhanced observation for language teaching: Reflection and professional development. Bloomsbury Academic. http://doi.org/10.5040/9781350085060
  65. Stannard, R. (2007). Using screen capture software in student feedback. H. E. Academy.
  66. Stannard, R. (2008). A new direction in feedback. Humanising language teaching, 10(6).
  67. Stirling, J. (2011). Teaching spelling to English language learners. Lulu.
  68. Tochon, F. (2008). A brief history of video feedback and its role in foreign language education. CALICO Journal, 25(3), 420-435. http://www.jstor.org/stable/calicojournal.25.3.420
  69. Truscott, J. (1999). What’s wrong with oral grammar correction. Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 437-456. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.55.4.437
  70. Van der Kleij, F., Adie, L., & Cumming, J. (2017). Using video technology to enable student voice in assessment feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(5), 1092-1105. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12536
  71. Walsh, S. (2022). SETTVEO: Evidence-based reflective practice and professional development. In P. Seedhouse (Ed.), Video enhanced observation for language teaching: Reflection and professional development (pp. 167-180). Bloomsbury Academic. http://doi.org/10.5040/9781350085060.ch-11
  72. Wang, Y.-H., & Young, S. S.-C. (2015). Effectiveness of feedback for enhancing English pronunciation in an ASR-based CALL system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(6), 493–504. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12079
  73. Watkins, J., & Wilkins, M. (2011). Using YouTube in the EFL classroom. Language Education In Asia, 2, 113-119. https://doi.org/10.5746/LEiA/11/V2/I1/A09/Watkins_Wilkins
  74. West, J., & Turner, W. (2016). Enhancing the assessment experience: improving student perceptions, engagement and understanding using online video feedback. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(4), 400-410. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2014.1003954
  75. Yousefi, M., & Nassaji, H. (2019). A meta-analysis of the effects of instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pragmatics and the role of moderator variables: Face-to-face vs. computer-mediated instruction. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 170(2), 277–308. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.19012.you
  76. Ziegler, N. (2016). Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 553–586. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500025X