The Effectiveness of Audio Feedback in Online Environments

Larisa Olesova,Purdue University

Christine MeloniNorthern Virginia Community College

Donald Weasenforth Collin College

TESOL 2011, New Orleans, LA

This study is supported by The International Research Foundation forEnglish Language Education (TIRF)

Introduction

Audio feedback in online environments

Definition:

technique by which instructors record their comments in digital audible form and attach them to students’ assignment

Introduction

Community of Inquiry Framework

Social presenceCognitive presenceTeaching presence

Social Presence

Definition:

The ability of participants in a community of inquiry to project themselves socially and emotionally as “real” people through the medium of communication being used

Cognitive Presence

Definition:

The extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse

Teaching Presence

Definition:

The design, facilitation, and direction of cognitive social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes

Background

Past studies on audio feedback for L1

Past studies on audio feedback for L2

Audio feedback in online environments for L1 and L2

Background

Past studies on audio feedback for ESL/EFL:

Constructive feedback Teachers’ time ESL/EFL and instructional feedback

strategies ESL/EFL students and perceived sense of

presence in online environments

Purpose of the Study: RQ1

RQ1: Is there a significant difference between EFL and ESL students’ perceptions of audio and text feedback when receiving audio feedback from a NNS?

Purpose of the Study: RQ2

RQ2: Is there a difference between EFL and ESL students’ perceptions of their sense of presence when receiving audio feedback from a NNS?

Methods: Participants

14 ESL students in the US 25 EFL students in Russia Age: 18-45 years

31 female 8 male

Methods: Procedure

Procedure

Students placed in five groups

Students organized by characteristics and language proficiency

Methods: Procedure

Methods: Procedure

Methods: Data Collection

Quantitative data:

Audio feedback Likert-type post-course survey

CoI Likert-type post-course survey

Data Collection

Qualitative data:

Audio feedback open-ended questions post-course survey

Methods: Data Analysis Descriptive statistics

Qualitative analysis of students’ answers to the open-ended questions

An independent samples t-test with its non-parametric equivalent Mann-Whitney Test

Multiple regression analyses

Results: RQ1 Satisfaction with receiving audio

feedback

Perceptions of audio feedback over text feedback

Perceptions of instructor’s voice clarity when providing audio feedback

Results: RQ1 Students’ perceptions of audio and

text feedback based on age, gender and previous online learning experience

Students’ perceptions of instructor’s voice clarity and instructor’s intent when using audio feedback

Results: RQ1Qualitative analyses:

EFL ESL

54.50%

85.70%

Both Types of Feedback Receiving Preferences

Results: RQ1

EFL ESL

68.20%

57.10%

Audio Feedback and Course Involvement

Results: RQ1

EFL for Text ESL for Text and Both

47.60%

42.90%

Type of Feedback Ef-fectiveness

Results: RQ1

EFL for Positive ESL No Differences

59.10%

42.80%

Students' Reaction on Audio Feedback

Results: RQ1

EFL for Audio Feedback ESL for Text Feedback

36.40%

42.80%

Student's Motivation

Results: RQ1

EFL for Audio Feedback ESL for Text Feedback

77.30%

57.10%

Personal Type of Feedback

Results: RQ1

An EFL student responded:“I think written comments are very clear, but audio is better, because you can hear intonations.”

versus

An ESL student:“The fact that is the instructor voice does not make any different.”

Results: RQ1

“It feel me more involved because it seems like I have real conversation with my instructor,” and “I think it is because you are listening to the teacher, so in a way you feel as if you were in a classroom.”

Results: RQ1

From an EFL student,:

“Audio comments made me feel more involved into the process,

so on receiving such an audio feedback you start to think that your

work is needful and your opinion is valuable.”

From an ESL student:

“It is true that we listen to someone who talks to us more than a

silent paper, so we get more from audio.”

Results: RQ1

From an EFL student:

“I think that both types are very important, but audio comments

influenced my motivation more.”

An ESL student said:

“I think both are effective. For me the difference is the kind of

student that we are.”

Results: RQ2

Perceptions of social presence

Perceptions of teaching presence

Perceptions of cognitive presence

Discussion

Preferences of ESL and EFL students

Audio feedback versus written feedback

Audio feedback and sense of presence

Conclusion

Effectiveness of audio feedback in online environments

Suggestions for future research

Thank you

Larisa Olesovalolesova@purdue.edu

Christine Melonicmeloni@nvcc.edu

Donald Weasenforthdweasenforth@collin.edu