A comparative analysis of the skilled use of automated feedback tools through the lens of teacher feedback literacy

Buckingham Shum, S; Lim, LA; Boud, D; Bearman, M; Dawson, P

A comparative analysis of the skilled use of automated feedback tools through the lens of teacher feedback literacy

Buckingham Shum, S

Lim, LA Boud, D

Bearman, M Dawson, P

Permalink

Publisher:: Springer Nature
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2023, 20, (1), pp. 40
Issue Date:: 2023-12-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (2.18 MB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Buckingham Shum, S https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6334-7429
dc.contributor.author	Lim, LA
dc.contributor.author	Boud, D https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6883-2722
dc.contributor.author	Bearman, M
dc.contributor.author	Dawson, P
dc.date.accessioned	2023-09-25T00:57:11Z
dc.date.available	2023-09-25T00:57:11Z
dc.date.issued	2023-12-01
dc.identifier.citation	International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2023, 20, (1), pp. 40
dc.identifier.issn	2365-9440
dc.identifier.issn	2365-9440
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/172260
dc.description.abstract	Effective learning depends on effective feedback, which in turn requires a set of skills, dispositions and practices on the part of both students and teachers which have been termed feedback literacy. A previously published teacher feedback literacy competency framework has identified what is needed by teachers to implement feedback well. While this framework refers in broad terms to the potential uses of educational technologies, it does not examine in detail the new possibilities of automated feedback (AF) tools, especially those that are open by offering varying degrees of transparency and control to teachers. Using analytics and artificial intelligence, open AF tools permit automated processing and feedback with a speed, precision and scale that exceeds that of humans. This raises important questions about how human and machine feedback can be combined optimally and what is now required of teachers to use such tools skillfully. The paper addresses two research questions: Which teacher feedback competencies are necessary for the skilled use of open AF tools? and What does the skilled use of open AF tools add to our conceptions of teacher feedback competencies? We conduct an analysis of published evidence concerning teachers’ use of open AF tools through the lens of teacher feedback literacy, which produces summary matrices revealing relative strengths and weaknesses in the literature, and the relevance of the feedback literacy framework. We conclude firstly, that when used effectively, open AF tools exercise a range of teacher feedback competencies. The paper thus offers a detailed account of the nature of teachers’ feedback literacy practices within this context. Secondly, this analysis reveals gaps in the literature, signalling opportunities for future work. Thirdly, we propose several examples of automated feedback literacy, that is, distinctive teacher competencies linked to the skilled use of open AF tools.
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	Springer Nature
dc.relation.ispartof	International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1186/s41239-023-00410-9
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.title	A comparative analysis of the skilled use of automated feedback tools through the lens of teacher feedback literacy
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	20
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Teaching and Learning)
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/DVC (Teaching and Learning)/Connected Intelligence Centre
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/FASS Faculty Administration
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CREDS - Centre for Research on Education in a Digital Society
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.date.updated	2023-09-25T00:57:09Z
pubs.issue	1
pubs.publication-status	Accepted
pubs.volume	20
utslib.citation.issue	1

Abstract:

Effective learning depends on effective feedback, which in turn requires a set of skills, dispositions and practices on the part of both students and teachers which have been termed feedback literacy. A previously published teacher feedback literacy competency framework has identified what is needed by teachers to implement feedback well. While this framework refers in broad terms to the potential uses of educational technologies, it does not examine in detail the new possibilities of automated feedback (AF) tools, especially those that are open by offering varying degrees of transparency and control to teachers. Using analytics and artificial intelligence, open AF tools permit automated processing and feedback with a speed, precision and scale that exceeds that of humans. This raises important questions about how human and machine feedback can be combined optimally and what is now required of teachers to use such tools skillfully. The paper addresses two research questions: Which teacher feedback competencies are necessary for the skilled use of open AF tools? and What does the skilled use of open AF tools add to our conceptions of teacher feedback competencies? We conduct an analysis of published evidence concerning teachers’ use of open AF tools through the lens of teacher feedback literacy, which produces summary matrices revealing relative strengths and weaknesses in the literature, and the relevance of the feedback literacy framework. We conclude firstly, that when used effectively, open AF tools exercise a range of teacher feedback competencies. The paper thus offers a detailed account of the nature of teachers’ feedback literacy practices within this context. Secondly, this analysis reveals gaps in the literature, signalling opportunities for future work. Thirdly, we propose several examples of automated feedback literacy, that is, distinctive teacher competencies linked to the skilled use of open AF tools.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/172260