learning - Academic Conferences Limited

Maria-Jesus Martinez-Argüelles et al.
regards the personalized feedback's addressee, this was chosen according to errors made while
carrying out the activity or because he/she did not pass the activity. This criteria intends to minimize
the number of answers to be elaborated by the teacher, but involves a lesser degree of
personalization. In order to fulfil this lack the multimedia feedback was complemented by written
feedback (in some occasions, reiteration of errors made by the student can provoke two multimedia
feedback entries). The cost of implementing such option is high but can be reduced in time for
different reasons: improvement of the teacher's abilities, generalized use of answers to concrete
problems and accumulation of examples and exercises solutions for the future (to be used in future
feedback or as complementary tools to be used in the learning process).
The pilot test carried out in the subject Behaviour of economic aggregates shows clearly the increase
of the amount of work that involves the personalized feedback, even if it is written (this excess work
was valued as double the work, though there have been attempts to save time with common answer
strategies). The strategy followed here varied according to results obtained by students and to the
test's features. In PAC 2 audio feedback was implemented when searching a major impact (the PAC
was not passed, the mark could have improved in relation with the previous PAC, …) whereas in the
rest of cases the option was written feedback (good results in PACs, non-submission of two of the
PACs,...) For the rest of PACs this has been the criteria followed when considering which feedback
should be implemented. Furthermore, video was introduced in cases where a rather common error
was made. In this case, technological abilities also become a key factor to be taken into account.
Here, the assessment made by the tutor is very positive due to the degree of proximity between
student and teacher that this technique allows. In this case, instead of facilitating understanding of
certain concepts, as happened in subjects such as Statistics Essentials, the most valued element is
improvement in the student's answer due to the impact that personalized feedback had on him/her.
Nonetheless, again it is remarkable the importance that dimension has when offering a correct
personalized feedback.
In Introduction to Accountability there was a general written answer to everybody in the first PAC,
then audio personalized feedback to those that submitted the second PAC and written to those that
had not done so. Video was used in the rest of activities. In this case, the only discrimination was
between students who has submitted the activity and those who had not. The degree of performance
of students in the classroom where the personalized feedback took place was higher.
In Business Introduction, feedback was also performed according to the mark, in text for the first
activity. From then on, the option was to incorporate audio / video feedback depending on the mark
obtained after the second activity, with a clear intention to improve the result in those cases where
they had not been positive. Together with these messages, written feedback was used when it was
necessary to complement some information. In this case, the teacher assessed that video or audio
feedback messages did not bring significant quality improvement with respect to the personalized
feedback in text. What is really considered as critic in this case is the possibility to perform
personalized feedback with all the students. The option to extend the use of such tools in the learning
process as a complement in cases where there are important doubts about the contents and the
teacher can clarify them, is raised.
Once all pilot tests have been presented, it is time to draw up a balance. The benefits of implementing
multimedia personalized feedback go in two aspects. The first one shows how useful is such
methodology in cases that it leads to improving understanding and learning of the subject, from the
correction of errors and the extension of contents. In this sense, it must be taken into account that the
fact of considering personalized and adapted to each student's needs feedback, is in itself a highly
positive elements that is worth counting on. The second aspect to be considered is the impact that
multimedia personalized feedback has on the student, due precisely to the fact that it has been done
in audio or in video. Some teachers pointed out the positive assessment of students on this option
and, therefore, it must be understood as an element to be taken into account in the future.
The costs involved in the adoption of this methodology are high and are directly related to the
dimension. Teachers must acquire technical and communication skills that need to be developed.
This is the reason why the need of training the teachers before implementing this option is suggested.
Time invested in preparing generalized and personalized feedback, both written and multimedia, is
quite high and, thus, it is necessary to assess how effective is to incorporate it. In fig. 1 we see that,
as an average, some 20% of the total time invested by the teacher, can be directly attributed to
461