Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring the Potential of Teacher-Learner Interactions Through Feedback in Online Formative Assessment: Demonstration Cases of Pre-service Physics Teachers

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Online learning overcomes space and time constraints; however, it presents challenges in teacher-learner interaction. This study explores the potential of feedback in online formative assessment (OFA) to enhance such interactions. This study identified different types of feedbacks and analyzed the characteristics of interactions between teachers, technology, and learners. The research participants were 22 pre-service physics teachers in Seoul, Korea. They used OFA in the demonstration of online classes, and the types of feedback were classified through their OFA utilization data, instruction plan, and observation data, with interviews supporting the results. The study classified each feedback type in detail through elaborated feedback (EF). For multiple-choice questions, the item-specific type was more effective than the answer-until-correct or summary types in providing customized feedback and adjusting classes. The feedback types of constructed-response questions focused on the specific content or subject integration but challenging to utilize for automated feedback. Based on these feedback types, the study identified the characteristics of interactions between teachers and students mediated by technology through demonstration observation. Social interaction between teachers and learners occurred via technology when the correct response was immediately provided per item. In this type, technology played a strong mediating role in the utilization of automatic feedback, and the teacher played a leading role in guiding the learner. Furthermore, EF provided per item enabled meaningful interactions. The study underscores the crucial role of teachers in providing meaningful support through OFA feedback in an evolving educational environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the authors, upon reasonable request.

References

  • Akyol, Z., Garrison, D. R., & Ozden, M. Y. (2009). Online and blended communities of inquiry: Exploring the developmental and perceptional differences. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(6), 65–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. W., de los Santos, E. X., Bodbyl, S., Covitt, B. A., Edwards, K. D., Hancock, J. B., et al. (2018). Designing educational systems to support enactment of the next generation science standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(7), 1026–1052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attali, Y., & van der Kleij, F. (2017). Effects of feedback elaboration and feedback timing during computer-based practice in mathematics problem solving. Computers & Education, 110, 154–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, A. W. (1997). The impact of technological change on open and distance learning. Distance Education, 18(1), 93–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beatty, I. D., & Gerace, W. J. (2009). Technology-enhanced formative assessment: A research-based pedagogy for teaching science with classroom response technology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(2), 146–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. E. (2015). The changing nature of educational assessment. Review of Research in Education, 39(1), 370–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ezra, O., Cohen, A., Bronshtein, A., Gabbay, H., & Baruth, O. (2021). Equity factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: Difficulties in emergency remote teaching (ert) through online learning. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7657–7681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerard, L., Kidron, A., & Linn, M. C. (2019). Guiding collaborative revision of science explanations. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 14(3), 291–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2333–2351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, M. (2007). Formative assessment: What do teachers need to know and do? Phi Delta Kappan, 89(2), 140–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaehnig, W., & Miller, M. L. (2007). Feedback types in programmed instruction: A systematic review. The Psychological Record, 57(2), 219–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jescovitch, L. N., Scott, E. E., Cerchiara, J. A., Merrill, J., Urban-Lurain, M., Doherty, J. H., & Haudek, K. C. (2021). Comparison of machine learning performance using analytic and holistic coding approaches across constructed response assessments aligned to a science learning progression. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(2), 150–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, S. M. (2012). Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: Valid research strategies for educators. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 3(1), 83–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 279–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., Choi, K., & Nam, J. (2000). The effects of formative assessment with detailed feedback on students’ science achievement, attitude, and interaction between teacher and students. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 20(3), 479–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. S., Gweon, G. H., Lord, T., Paessel, N., Pallant, A., & Pryputniewicz, S. (2021). Machine learning-enabled automated feedback: Supporting students’ revision of scientific arguments based on data drawn from simulation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(2), 168–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mao, L., Liu, O. L., Roohr, K., Belur, V., Mulholland, M., Lee, H. S., & Pallant, A. (2018). Validation of automated scoring for a formative assessment that employs scientific argumentation. Educational Assessment, 23(2), 121–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, M. E. (1999). Cognition and the question of test item format. Educational Psychologist, 34(4), 207–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, T., & Yan, Z. (2017). Diverse delivery methods and strong psychological benefits: A review of online formative assessment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(6), 562–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, J. H. (2010). The practical implications of educational aims and contexts for formative assessment. In H. L. Andrade & G. J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of Formative Assessment (pp. 41–58). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, J. H. (2014). Classroom assessment: principles and practices for effective standards-based instruction (6th ed.). Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback research review. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 745–783). Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning; a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pachler, N., Daly, C., Mor, Y., & Mellar, H. (2010). Formative e-assessment: Practitioner cases. Computers & Education, 54(3), 715–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavin Ivanec, T. (2022). The lack of academic social interactions and students’ learning difficulties during COVID-19 faculty lockdowns in Croatia: The mediating role of the perceived sense of life disruption caused by the pandemic and the adjustment to online studying. Social Sciences, 11(2), 42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (3rd ed.).

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Kleij, F., & Adie, L. (2018). Formative assessment and feedback using information technology. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K. W. Lai (Eds.), Second handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 601–615). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • van der Kleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J., Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2012). Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 263–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C., & Eggen, T. J. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 475–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Pol, J., van den Berg, B. A. M., Admiraal, W. F., & Simons, P. R. J. (2008). The nature, reception, and use of online peer feedback in higher education. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1804–1817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vonderwell, S., Liang, X., & Alderman, K. (2007). Asynchronous discussions and assessment in online learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(3), 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhai, X., Shi, L., & Nehm, R. H. (2021). A meta-analysis of machine learning-based science assessments: Factors impacting machine-human score agreements. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(3), 361–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics Education, Seoul National University, 1, Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Hyojoon Kim & Jinwoong Song

  2. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation, 8, Gyohak-ro, Jincheon-gun, Chungcheongbuk-do, Republic of Korea

    Hyojoon Kim

Authors
  1. Hyojoon Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jinwoong Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jinwoong Song.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The questionnaire and methodology for this study were approved by the Human Research Ethics committee of the Seoul National University (IRB No. 2007/003-048).

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, H., Song, J. Exploring the Potential of Teacher-Learner Interactions Through Feedback in Online Formative Assessment: Demonstration Cases of Pre-service Physics Teachers. Res Sci Educ 53, 1145–1161 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10127-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10127-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation