McCarthy¹ contains a case study comparing typed, oral and video feedback.

• Should be possible to combine with a feedback form (see below).
• More legible.
• Turnitin allows highlighting of relevant parts of student work for specific comment in a legible manner.
• Turnitin allows tutors to create, save and share common in-margin comments.
• Tutors can also save their extended feedback in Word to share and reuse, this speeding up marking time.
• Easier for students to locate and go back to at a later date when they want to use the feed-forward.
• Possible to monitor the amount of time that students are spending accessing (and therefore engaging with) their feedback.
• Students can access privately at a time of their choosing, rather than having to collect their work or have it handed back in class.²

• Health and safety implications of extended periods of online marking need to be taken into consideration when planning marking and teams of markers.
• Can appear impersonal. Open to error of copying the wrong feedback if under pressure.

• Feedback should refer to the marking criteria - hence if forms are standardised around common marking criteria for the programme or within a particular part of the programme, then students can monitor their progression or identify areas of particular weakness for improvement.
• A well-designed form can speed up marking (e.g. check boxes, grading against each criteria), although tutors should also include more detailed personal feedback, particularly where feed-forward is needed.

• Can appear impersonal or overly restrictive/complex.

• Feedback is relatively personal and likely to be more detailed than typed feedback given in the same time.
• Easy to emphasise key points to improve student comprehension.¹
• Once colleagues are familiar with the system, feedback is relatively speedy.
• Software for recording oral comments is freely available and can be easily integrated with Turnitin, so there are no additional setup cots.

• Health and safety impact of electronic marking as above.
• Not all colleagues will want to record feedback.
• Colleagues may need time to get used to the technology, so marking the first few assignments may take longer.
• May be harder for students to access.
• Students sometimes see recorded oral feedback as being less 'official' than written feedback, or feel that they have to transcribe it to get the full benefit.

GRASS video on How to record video feedback.

• Feedback is highly personal.
• Students can see their work on screen at the same time as their tutor's face so can see clearly how what the tutor is saying applies to their essay.
• The tutor is likely to be able to give more comprehensive feedback than they could if they typed feedback for the same amount of time.
• Provided the tutor comes across as approachable, students should take feedback as constructive criticism and feed-forward, rather than personally.
• Some software for producing video feedback is freely available.

• Takes longer per assignment than oral feedback alone because the larger data files take longer to upload.
• Health and safety impact of electronic marking as above.
• Not all colleagues will want to appear on video.
• Colleagues may need time to get used to the technology, so the first few assignments could take longer.
• Requires specific technology, so could take time and resource to set up, and possibly also less accessible to the students.¹
• Students sometimes see the feedback as being less 'official' than written feedback, or feel that they have to transcribe it to get the full benefit of it.

• Can be tailored to suit the needs of the cohort. For example, this could include an annotated exemplar answer, and common problems and ways to improve (so that all students obtain feed-forward from the performance of the cohort as a whole).
• Alternative, feedback could be given a part of a lecture.
• Consider giving generic feedback before individual feedback is available. Prompt feedback when students can still remember the assignment clearly is more likely to provide helpful feed-forward. Remember to check, however, that there are no students with extensions beyond the date on which you release the feedback.
• Remember that generic feedback to the cohort might also be a useful source of information on where the programme or the module should be improved for the following year.

• None, provided that this is used in addition to individual feedback and marks for all summative assessments and at least some formative assessments across the cohort - although for the feedback to be useful, it may be necessary to mark some of the individual assessments before writing the generic feedback.
• Students perceive groups feedback alone as less helpful and personal.

• Private and allow concentration on the student's individual needs, irrespective of how well they are doing. Students can ask questions of the tutor.

• Time-consuming and inefficient. However, tutors should make sure that they are available for one-to-one meetings with any student who feels they need one, and offer meetings to any students they identify as struggling.
• The challenge is to provide high quality feedback to the cohort as a whole to keep the number of one-to-ones to a minimum.

Can also be used for summative tests.

• Feedback and a student's score are instant. Comprehensive feedback can be provided by including explanations of the incorrect answers, as well as the correct ones.
• A quick and efficient way of consolidating learning and providing feedback and feed-forward.³
• Very useful on large cohorts so that students can test their knowledge independently. Colleagues can access the results to identify struggling or disengaged students, as well as questions that the entire cohort finds difficult and adjust teaching accordingly.
• The tests can be set up so that students can repeat them as many times as they like.

• High initial investment of time but, provided the feedback is sufficiently clear and comprehensive, very efficient thereafter.
• Not very personal.
• Can be used for summative tests, but the software can be problematic, and tutors are expected to provide students with support in resetting tests, etc. Perhaps more suitable for smaller cohorts where the test can be taken at an appointed time in a computer room.

• Reduces marking time for staff; encourages students to engage with the marking criteria and become more assessment literate.

• Could be seen by the students as tutors avoiding the work involved in marking.