A comparative analysis of the skilled use of automated feedback tools through the lens of teacher feedback literacy

Simon Buckingham Shum · Lisa-Angelique Lim · David J. Boud · Margaret Bearman · Phillip Dawson

57 citations0/0 files storedInternational Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Student Assessment and Feedback Artificial Intelligence in Education Online Learning and Analytics

Abstract

Abstract Effective learning depends on effective feedback, which in turn requires a set of skills, dispositions and practices on the part of both students and teachers which have been termed feedback literacy. A previously published teacher feedback literacy competency framework has identified what is needed by teachers to implement feedback well. While this framework refers in broad terms to the potential uses of educational technologies, it does not examine in detail the new possibilities of automated feedback (AF) tools, especially those that are open by offering varying degrees of transparency and control to teachers. Using analytics and artificial intelligence, open AF tools permit automated processing and feedback with a speed, precision and scale that exceeds that of humans. This raises important questions about how human and machine feedback can be combined optimally and what is now required of teachers to use such tools skillfully. The paper addresses two research questions: Which teacher feedback competencies are necessary for the skilled use of open AF tools? and What does the skilled use of open AF tools add to our conceptions of teacher feedback competencies? We conduct an analysis of published evidence concerning teachers’ use of open AF tools through the lens of teacher feedback literacy, which produces summary matrices revealing relative strengths and weaknesses in the literature, and the relevance of the feedback literacy framework. We conclude firstly, that when used effectively, open AF tools exercise a range of teacher feedback competencies. The paper thus offers a detailed account of the nature of teachers’ feedback literacy practices within this context. Secondly, this analysis reveals gaps in the literature, signalling opportunities for future work. Thirdly, we propose several examples of automated feedback literacy, that is, distinctive teacher competencies linked to the skilled use of open AF tools.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 57 citations exist upstream.

References

2009A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies 1990Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance.2018The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback 2012Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design 2004Research Genres 2020The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research 2016Supporting Learners' Agentic Engagement With Feedback: A Systematic Review and a Taxonomy of Recipience Processes 2020Teacher feedback literacy and its interplay with student feedback literacy

Cited by

2025Unlocking student potential: How AI-driven personalized feedback shapes goal achievement, self-efficacy, and learning engagement through a self-determination lens

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.