Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 
 

Files

File List


Traditional versus Electronic.pdf (613.01 KB)

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

Traditional versus Electronic: A Study of Effective Feedback Methods

Reed, Terry L, Reed
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6736-3541
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=findlay1532477433299818

Abstract Details

2018, Doctor of Education (Ed.D.), University of Findlay, Education.
This study examined how student’s scores vary on two different writing assignments, what were the student’s perceptions, and any correlations that may arise from the use of two different methods of providing formative feedback to high school juniors. Many studies support the use of technology and demonstrate how technology plays a significant role in the classroom by helping students see their own errors through reflection (Hennessy & Forrester, 2014; Hulsman & Van der Vloodt, 2015; Steinweg et al., 2006). The results of this study show a 4-point increase in the mean scores when handwritten feedback is compared to electronic feedback. The performance of a two-tail paired t-test, with 0.01 being the result with an alpha of 0.05, helped to determine the rejection of the null hypothesis. The preference of the students resulted in 85% positive responses with handwritten feedback and 15% negative, while 53% of the population had a positive response towards electronic feedback with 47% responding in the negative. Examining the relationship between student preference, ease of understanding, and clarity of the feedback against the student’s scores, there is a moderate positive relationship between the clarity of the feedback as well as to the ease of understanding the feedback. However, when examining the relationship between student preference towards electronically provided feedback and the scores, there is a weak positive relationship. Further exploration of this phenomenon is warranted based upon the setting of the population being in an economically depressed Appalachian region of the United States.
John Cindric, Ed. D. (Committee Chair)
Jon Brasfield, Ph. D. (Committee Member)
C. Damon Osborne, Ph. D. (Committee Member)
90 p.
Education; Educational Technology
Rural School; Appalachia; Effective Feedback; Feedback; Rural Schools; Technology

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Reed, Reed, T. L. (2018). Traditional versus Electronic: A Study of Effective Feedback Methods [Doctoral dissertation, University of Findlay]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=findlay1532477433299818

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Reed, Reed, Terry. Traditional versus Electronic: A Study of Effective Feedback Methods. 2018. University of Findlay, Doctoral dissertation. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=findlay1532477433299818.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Reed, Reed, Terry. "Traditional versus Electronic: A Study of Effective Feedback Methods." Doctoral dissertation, University of Findlay, 2018. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=findlay1532477433299818

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)

findlay1532477433299818
1,214
© 2018, all rights reserved.
This open access ETD is published by University of Findlay and OhioLINK.