Students’ Perceptions of and Responses to Oral Podcast Feedback on Their Writing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.29-3.20030Keywords:
Formative assessment, oral feedback, teaching English as a second language, writing in English, SDG 4, quality education, writing skillsAbstract
Introduction. This study proposes an approach to developing English writing skills through oral feedback delivered via podcast. Feedback is regarded as a fundamental component of the academic writing learning process. In particular, feedback provided on writing tasks has been the focus of extensive research, such as that conducted by Christiansen and Bloch (2016) and Sommers (2013). We suggest that personalized attention can be achieved through oral feedback via podcasts. Some authors indicate that audio feedback triggers a sense of connectivity between the teacher and the student (Kirwan et al., 2023). Aim. The aim of this research was to investigate students’ perceptions and actions towards the use of podcasts as a method of receiving feedback. Methodology. This is qualitative research. The data collected were the perceptions and actions of university students on their writing tasks in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) class. The participants were 26 university students majoring in English as a second language and taking a course that included process writing. A semi-structured interview was conducted with the participants to gather their perceptions and actions after receiving oral feedback via podcast. Results. The results indicated that the participants valued and considered detailed and precise oral feedback. They expressed positive feelings about the tone of the teacher’s voice and the direct relationship between the feedback received and the task.
Downloads
References
Anson, C. M., Dannels, D. P., Laboy, J. I., & Carneiro, L. (2016). Students’ perceptions of oral screencast responses to their writing: Exploring digitally mediated identities. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 30(3), 378-411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651916636424
Arancibia Gutiérrez, B., Tapia-Ladino, M., & Correa Pérez, R. (2019). La retroalimentación durante el proceso de escritura de la tesis en carreras de pedagogía: Descripción de los comentarios escritos de los profesores guías. Revista Signos, 52(100), 242-264. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342019000200242
Berry, C. (2019). La voz y el actor. ALBA Editorial.
Bond, S. (2009). Audio feedback. Centre for Learning Technology. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/48910115_Audio_feedback
Carless, D. (2019). Learners’ feedback literacy and the longer-term: Developing capacity for impact. En M. Henderson, R. Ajjawi, D. Boud, & E. Molloy (Eds.), The impact of feedback in higher education: Improving assessment outcomes for learners (pp. 51-67). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25112-3_4
CETL. (2020). How to provide high - quality Audio Feedback? https://er.talic.hku.hk/tel/guides/audio-feedback/
Christiansen, M. S. & Bloch, J. (2016) “Papers are never finished, just abandoned”: The role of written teacher comments in the revision process. Journal of Response to Writing, 2(1), 1-38. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/journalrw/vol2/iss1/2
Correa Pérez, R. & Flores Flores, J. (2018). Students’ decisions about the teacher’s types of written feedback on short stories in english. Logos: Revista de Lingüística, Filosofía y Literatura, 28(2), 248-264. https://doi.org/10.15443/RL2819
Correa Pérez, R., Tapia-Ladino, M., & Arancibia Gutiérrez, B. (2021). Written comments on undergraduate theses written in spanish as a first language and english as a foreign language. Signum: Estudos da Linguagem, 24(1), 52-79. https://doi.org/10.5433/2237-4876.2021v24n1p62
Correa, R. (Investigadora principal). (2021). Secuencia didáctica para proveer retroalimentación oral con el uso de podcast (Registro Derecho de Autor: 2021-A-10171). https://direcciones.ucsc.cl/content/uploads/sites/31/2024/08/OTT_DDA_10_2023.pdf
Dawson, P., Henderson, M., Mahoney, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2019). What makes for effective feedback: Staff and student perspectives. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1467877
Driscoll, D. L. & Wells, J. (2012). Beyond knowledge and skills: Writing transfer and the role of student dispositions. Composition Forum, 26. https://compositionforum.com/issue/26/beyond-knowledge-skills.php
Esterhazy, R. (2018). What matters for productive feedback? Disciplinary practices and their relational dynamics. In Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1302-1314. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463353
Esterhazy, R. (2019). Re-conceptualizing feedback through a sociocultural lens. In M. Henderson, R. Ajjawi, D. Boud, & E. Molloy (Eds) The impact of feedback in higher education. Improving assessment outcomes for learners (pp. 67-82). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25112-3_5
Guskey, T. R. & Brookhart, S. M. (2019). What we know about grading: What works, what doesn’t, and what’s next. ASCD.
Henderson, M., Ryan, T., & Phillips, M. (2019). The challenges of feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(8), 1237-1252. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1599815
Killingback, C., Ahmed, O., & Williams, J. (2019). ‘It was all in your voice’-tertiary student perceptions of alternative feedback modes (audio, video, podcast, and screencast): A qualitative literature review. Nurse education today, 72, 32-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.10.012
Kirwan, A., Raftery, S., & Gormley, C. (2023). Sounds good to me: A qualitative study to explore the use of audio to potentiate the student feedback experience. Journal of Professional Nursing, 47(2023), 25-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2023.03.020
Lim, L.-A., Dawson, S., Gašević, D., Joksimović, S., Pardo, A., Fudge, A., & Gentili, S. (2021). Students’ perceptions of, and emotional responses to, personalised learning analytics-based feedback: An exploratory study of four courses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(3), 339-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1782831
Link, L. J. & Guskey, T. R., (2019). How traditional grading contribute to student inequities and how to fix it. Curriculum in Contexst, 45(1), 12-19. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/edp_facpub/53
Liu, C., & Yu, S. (2022). Exploring master’s students’ emotions and emotion-regulation in supervisory feedback situations: A vignette-based study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(7), 1101-1115. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.2005770
Lunt, T. & Curran, J. (2010). ‘’Are you listening please?’ The advantages of electronic audio feedback compared to written feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(7), 759-769. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902977772
Mahoney, P. Macfarlane, S., & Ajjawi, R. (2019). A qualitative synthesis of video feedback in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(2), 157-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1471457
Molloy, E., Noble, C., & Ajjawi, R. (2019). Attending to emotion in feedback. In M. Henderson, R. Ajjawi, D. Boud, & E. Molloy (Eds.), The impact of feedback in Higher Education. Improving assessment outcomes for learners (pp. 83-105). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25112-3_6
Pekrun, R. & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2012). Academic emotions and student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 259-283). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_12
Pekrun, R., Marsh, H. W., Elliot, A. J., Stockinger, K., Perry, R. P., Vogl, E., Goetz, T., van Tilburg, W. A. P., Lüdtke, O., & Vispoel, W. P. (2023). A three-dimensional taxonomy of achievement emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(1), 145-178. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000448
Putri, N. V. W., Munir, A., & Anam, S. (2021). Students’ perceptions of teacher feedback in EFL english class and their self-regulated learning after receiving feedback. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 11(1), 42-60. https://doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v11i1.2237
Rawle, F., Thuna, M., Zhao, T., & Kaler, M. (2018). Audio feedback: Student and teachinga perspectives on an alternative mode of feedback for written assignments. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(2), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2018.2.2
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
Salgado Lévano, A. C. (2007). Investigación cualitativa: Diseños, evaluación del rigor metodológico y retos. Liberabit, 13(13), 71-78. http://www.scielo.org.pe/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1729-48272007000100009&lng=es&tlng=es
Sommers, N. (2013). Responding to student writers. Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Tapia-Ladino, M., Correa Pérez, R., & Arancibia Gurtiérrez, B. (2017). Retroalimentación con comentarios escritos de ajuste al género (CEAG) en el proceso de elaboración de tesis de Programas de Formación de profesores. Lenguas Modernas, (50), 175-192. https://lenguasmodernas.uchile.cl/index.php/LM/article/view/49257
Winstone, N. & Carless, D. (2019). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351115940
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017). Supporting learners’ agentic engagement with feedback: A systematic review and a taxonomy of recipience processes. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 17-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Roxanna Correa-Pérez, Mónica Tapia-Ladino
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.
1. In case the submitted paper is accepted for publication, the author(s) FREELY, COSTLESS, EXCLUSIVELY AND FOR AN INDEFINITE TERM transfer copyrights and patrimonial rights to Universidad Nacional (UNA, Costa Rica). For more details check the Originality Statement and Copyright Transfer Agreement
2. REUTILIZATION RIGHTS: UNA authorizes authors to use, for any purpose (among them selfarchiving or autoarchiving) and to publish in the Internet in any electronic site, the paper´'s final version, both approved and published (post print), as long as it is done with a non commercial purpose, does not generate derivates without previous consentment and recognizes both publisher's name and authorship.
3. The submission and possible publication of the paper in the Educare Electronic Journal is ruled by the Journal’s editorial policies, the institutional rules of Universidad Nacional and the laws of the Republic of Costa Rica. Additionally, any possible difference of opinion or future dispute shall be settled in accordance with the mechanisms of Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Costa Rican Jurisdiction.
4. In all cases, it is understood that the opinions issued are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position and opinion of Educare, CIDE or Universidad Nacional, Costa Rica. It is also understood that, in the exercise of academic freedom, the authors have carried out a rogorous scientific-academic process of research, reflection and argumentation thar lays within the thematic scope of interest of the Journal.
5. The papers published by Educare Electronic Journal use a Creative Commons License:
The articles published by Educare Electronic Journal can be shared with a Creative Commons License: 
