Raísa Correa Fortes
Master's – Discussing the role of feedback in distance higher education from a teaching perspective
Advisor: Profa. Dra. Bernadete de Lourdes Marinho Grandolpho
Comission: Profs. Drs. Gilberto de Andrade Martins, Liliana Vasconcellos Guedes and Antonio Carlos Gil
Link YouTube: https://youtu.be/4w0ypnw8dX4
With the facilitation of access to higher education, many programs, such as business administration, experienced a drop in their quality indexes as evaluated based on ENADE. Nevertheless, in distance education, business administration students have superior performance compared to traditional programs. In many countries, Brazil included, distance education has driven the expansion of higher education, mainly in the two last decades. However, despite seeing the best indicators, distance education brings some challenges, which must be faced. Distance education programs require students to have autonomy, motivation, and lead the learning process. Such characteristics are found in self-regulated students. However, a factor in this process that remains unchanged is the need for interaction with the professor, who, by assessing students, must identify their needs and intervene when necessary. These interventions are carried out by way of feedback, which is also important to mediate the self-regulation process. The relevant literature has yet to establish which types of feedback contribute to student self-regulation. Thus, using a mixed-method approach of concurrent procedures, a survey was carried out with 116 distance education teachers from different areas of knowledge. The descriptive analysis allowed us to identify and prioritize the types of feedback used by teachers according to the taxonomy proposed by Chetwynd and Dobbyn (2011), employing rubrics as a tool. At this stage, it was identified that the four types of feedback in their taxonomy are used in distance education. Hierarchically, retrospective feedback on content is the most commonly used to provide feedback by rubrics (67%), followed by future-altering on content (66%); skill feedback is provided by fewer teachers, but the emphasis remains on a retrospective character: retrospective on skills (58%); and future-altering on skills (32%). From the results, we can also infer that feedback has contributed to students’ self-regulation, being effective for adjustments in tasks, improved performance, and autonomy. Through content analysis, it was possible to understand the importance that distance education teachers attribute to feedback practice as well as their main difficulties in this process, which may be related to the results of their interventions. In this way, this study contributes to the theory and to the management practices of higher education institutes discussed throughout this work.
*Abstract provided by the author