logo logo European Journal of Educational Research

EU-JER is is a, peer reviewed, online academic research journal.

Subscribe to

Receive Email Alerts

for special events, calls for papers, and professional development opportunities.

Subscribe

Publisher (HQ)

Eurasian Society of Educational Research
Eurasian Society of Educational Research
7321 Parkway Drive South, Hanover, MD 21076, USA
Eurasian Society of Educational Research
Headquarters
7321 Parkway Drive South, Hanover, MD 21076, USA
communication esl supervisory feedback online feedback performance

The Effects of Online Supervisory Feedback on Student-Supervisor Communications during the COVID-19

Ushba Rasool , Muhammad Zammad Aslam , Jiancheng Qian , Sami Hussein Hakeem Barzani

This study focuses on online supervisory written feedback on PhD supervisees’ performance, given explicitly through online communication, partic.

T

This study focuses on online supervisory written feedback on PhD supervisees’ performance, given explicitly through online communication, particularly during the first wave of COVID-19. This unusual situation has brought many different effects on students’ academic lives. This scenario has influenced both students’ and teachers’ mutual communication. A directed qualitative content analysis (DQCA) approach was adapted from previous research and modified for the present context. The current study planned to bring forth the supervisee and supervisors’ perception of the communication and feedback process, considering that online feedback and communication has been a new experience for most students. According to the findings, teachers/supervisors give feedback on students’ production, whereas teacher-student communication also seemed crucial for the performance improvising of learners. The result brought forth a wide range of social, educational, and surprisingly psychological issues both supervisees and supervisors faced during online communication during COVID-19.

Keywords: Communication, ESL, supervisory feedback, online feedback, performance.

cloud_download PDF
Cite
Article Metrics
Views
555
Download
416
Citations
Crossref
0

Scopus
8

References

Anderson, T. (2021). The socialization of L2 doctoral students through written feedback. Journal of Language, Identity & Education20(2), 134-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2020.1726758

Andrade, H., & Cizek, G. J. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of formative assessment. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203874851

Aslam, M. Z., Barzani, S. H., Aslam, T., & Rasool, U. (2021). Teachers and students’ perceptions towards online ESL classrooms during COVID-19: An empirical study in North Cyprus. Journal of Asia TEFL, 18(4), 1423-1431. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.4.22.1423

Assarroudi, A., Heshmati Nabavi, F., Armat, M. R., Ebadi, A., & Vaismoradi, M. (2018). Directed qualitative content analysis: The description and elaboration of its underpinning methods and data analysis process. Journal of Research in Nursing23(1), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987117741667

Azman, H., Nor, N. F. M., & Aghwela, H. O. M. (2014). Investigating supervisory feedback practices and their impact on international research student’s thesis development: A case study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences141, 152-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.028

Barzani, S. H., Aslam, M. Z., & Aslam, T. (2021). The role of technology in ELL classes in Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. International Journal of Language Education, 5(2), 30-39. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v5i2.14109

Benson, S., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Effects of written corrective feedback and language aptitude on verb tense accuracy. Language Teaching Research23(6), 702-726. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818770921

Bitchener, J., Basturkmen, H., & East, M. (2011). The focus of supervisor written feedback to thesis/dissertation students. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 79-97. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119201

Bridge, P., & Appleyard, R. (2005). System failure: A comparison of electronic and paper-based assignment submission, marking, and feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(4), 669-671. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00485.x     

Buckley, E., & Cowap, L. (2013). Transformation in assessment and feedback: An evaluation of the piloted use of Turnitin for electronic submission, marking and as a formative feedback tool from an educator’s perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology44(4), 562-570. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12054

Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572132

Coyne, I. T. (1997). Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(3), 623-630. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.t01-25-00999.x

Davies, J., & Graff, M. (2005). Performance in e‐learning: Online participation and student grades. British Journal of Educational Technology36(4), 657-663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00542.x  

Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE open4(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633

Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x

Fan, L., Mahmood, M., & Uddin, M. A. (2019). Supportive Chinese supervisor, innovative international students: A social exchange theory perspective. Asia Pacific Education Review20(1), 101-115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-018-9572-3  

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Making time for feedback. Educational Leadership70(1), 42-47. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1002439

Gould, J., & Day, P. (2013). Hearing you loud and clear: Student perspectives of audio feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education38(5), 554-566. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.660131  

Graneheim, U. H., Lindgren, B. M., & Lundman, B. (2017). Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper. Nurse Education Today56, 29-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.06.002

Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today24(2), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001   

Hast, M., & Healy, C. (2018). It’s like fifty-fifty: Using the student voice towards enhancing undergraduates’ engagement with online feedback provision. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology7(1), 139-151. https://doi.org/10.14434/jotlt.v7i1.23806

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F003465430298487   

Hawari, O. M. A., Al-Shboul, Y., & Huwari, I. F. (2022). Supervisors’ perspectives on graduate students’ problems in academic writing. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(1), 545-556. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.1.545  

Holsti, O. R. (1968). Content analysis. In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology, vol 2  (pp. 596-692). Addison-Wesley.

Hounsell, D. (2021). Feedback in postgraduate online learning: Perspectives and practices. In Online Postgraduate Education in a Postdigital World (pp. 39-62). Springer, Cham.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77673-2_3  

Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

Inouye, K., & McAlpine, L. (2019). Developing academic identity: A review of the literature on doctoral writing and feedback. International Journal of Doctoral Studies14, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.28945/4168  

Iqbal, Z., Aslam, M. Z., Aslam, T., Ashraf, R., Kashif, M., & Nasir, H. (2020). Persuasive power concerning COVID-19 employed by premier Imran Khan: A socio-political discourse analysis. Register Journal, 13(1), 208-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v13i1.208-230  

Kibiswa, N. K. (2019). Directed qualitative content analysis (DQlCA): A tool for conflict analysis. The Qualitative Report24(8), 2059-2079. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2019.3778  

Kim, Y., Choi, B., Kang, S., Kim, B., & Yun, H. (2020). Comparing the effects of direct and indirect synchronous written corrective feedback: Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions. Foreign Language Annals53(1), 176-199. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12443  

Kyngäs, H. (2020). Qualitative research and content analysis. In The application of content analysis in nursing science research (pp. 3-11). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30199-6_1   

Langer, M., König, C. J., & Papathanasiou, M. (2019). Highly automated job interviews: Acceptance under the influence of stakes. International Journal of Selection and Assessment27(3), 217-234. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12246  

Lee, I. (2019). Teacher written corrective feedback: Less is more. Language Teaching52(4), 524-536. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444819000247

Lee, I. (2020). Utility of focused/comprehensive written corrective feedback research for authentic L2 writing classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing49, 100734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100734

Lee, I., Luo, N., & Mak, P. (2021). Teachers’ attempts at focused written corrective feedback in Situ. Journal of Second Language Writing, 100809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100809

Li, S., & Vuono, A. (2019). Twenty-five years of research on oral and written corrective feedback in system. System, 84, 93-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.05.006

Lizzio, A., & Wilson, K. (2008). Feedback on assessment: Students’ perceptions of quality and effectiveness. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education33(3), 263-275. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701292548  

Löfström, E., & Pyhältö, K. (2021). How research on ethics in doctoral supervision can inform doctoral education policy. The Future of Doctoral Research: Challenges and Opportunities, 295-306. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003015383-30  

Lundgren, L., Stofer, K. A., Dunckel, B. A., Krieger, J., Lange, M., & James, V. (2019). Panel-based exhibit using participatory design elements may motivate behavior change. Journal of Science Communication18(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.18020203  

Lust, G., Collazo, N. A. J., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2012). Content management systems: Enriched learning opportunities for all? Computers in Human Behavior28(3), 795-808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.12.009  

Mao, S. S., & Crosthwaite, P. (2019). Investigating written corrective feedback: (Mis)alignment of teachers’ beliefs and practice. Journal of Second Language Writing45, 46-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.05.004

Mao, Z., & Lee, I. (2020). Feedback scope in written corrective feedback: Analysis of empirical research in L2 contexts. Assessing Writing45, 100469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100469

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research/ Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung1(2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-1.2.1089  

Mayring, P. (2015). Qualitative content analysis: Theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution. In A. Bikner-Ahsbahs, C. Knipping, & N. Presmeg, (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education: Examples of methodology and methods (pp. 365-380). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9181-6_13

McCabe, J., Doerflinger, A., & Fox, R. (2011). Student and faculty perceptions of e-feedback. Teaching of Psychology38(3), 173-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311411794

Mensink, P. J., & King, K. (2020). Student access of online feedback is modified by the availability of assessment marks, gender and academic performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1), 10-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12752  

Mohamadi, Z. (2018). Comparative effect of online summative and formative assessment on EFL student writing ability. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 59, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.02.003

Mydin, F., & Surat, S. (2021). Research capability: Early-career academics’ perception of doctoral studies. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(4), 1893-1905. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.4.1893

Neupane Bastola, M. (2021). Formulation of feedback comments: Insights from supervisory feedback on master’s theses. Innovations in Education and Teaching International58(5), 565-574. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1804985   

Parkes, M., & Fletcher, P. (2017). A longitudinal, quantitative study of student attitudes towards audio feedback for assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education42(7), 1046-1053. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1224810  

Pitt, E., & Norton, L. (2017). ‘Now that’s the feedback I want!’Students’ reactions to feedback on graded work and what they do with it. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education42(4), 499-516. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1142500  

Poland, B. D. (1995). Transcription quality as an aspect of rigor in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry1(3), 290-310. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780049500100302

Pyhältö, K., Toom, A., Stubb, J., & Lonka, K. (2012). Challenges of Becoming a Scholar: A Study of Doctoral Students’ Problems and Well-Being. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2012(Article ID 934941), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/934941  

Reynolds, B. L., & Kao, C. W. (2021). The effects of digital game-based instruction, teacher instruction, and direct focused written corrective feedback on the grammatical accuracy of English articles. Computer Assisted Language Learning34(4), 462-482. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1617747  

Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press.

Steele, J., & Holbeck, R. (2018). Five elements that impact quality feedback in the online asynchronous classroom. Journal of Educators Online15(3), n3. https://doi.org/10.9743/jeo.2018.15.3.10

Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences 15(3), 398-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12048  

Vattøy, K. D., & Smith, K. (2019). Students’ perceptions of teachers’ feedback practice in teaching English as a foreign language. Teaching and Teacher Education85, 260-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.06.024  

Wildemuth, B. M. (Ed.). (2016). Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science. Abc-Clio.

Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Rowntree, J., & Parker, M. (2017). It’d be useful, but I wouldn’t use it: Barriers to university students’ feedback seeking and recipience. Studies in Higher Education42(11), 2026-2041. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1130032  

Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. S. (2013). Adaptability to online learning: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. Community College Research Center, 54, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.7916/D82N59NB   

Yang, M., Mak, P., & Yuan, R. (2021). Feedback experience of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: Voices from pre-service English language teachers. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher30(6), 611-620. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820906281  

Zhang, L. J., & Cheng, X. (2021). Examining the effects of comprehensive written corrective feedback on L2 EAP students’ linguistic performance: A mixed-methods study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes54, 101043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.101043  

Zhang, T. (2021). The effect of highly focused versus mid-focused written corrective feedback on EFL learners’ explicit and implicit knowledge development. System99, 102493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102493  

Zhang, Y., Yu, S., & Yuan, K. (2020). Understanding master’s students’ peer feedback practices from the academic discourse community perspective: A rethinking of postgraduate pedagogies. Teaching in Higher Education25(2), 126-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1543261   

Zhu, M., Liu, O. L., & Lee, H. S. (2020). The effect of automated feedback on revision behavior and learning gains in formative assessment of scientific argument writing. Computers & Education143, 103668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103668

...