See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/358083112

The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process

Article  in  Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability · December 2021

DOI: 10.2478/jtes-2021-0019

CITATIONS READS

0 243

2 authors, including:

Pāvels Jurs
Liepaja University
44 PUBLICATIONS   19 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

“Improving the initial education of adult immigrants” (2IMINED) Nr. 2016-1-LT01-KA204-023223 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Pāvels Jurs on 25 January 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

DOI: 10.2478/jtes-2021-0019

Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability,

vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 91ñ105, 2021

The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process

P‚vels Jurs and Elita –pehte

University of Liepaja, Liepaja, Latvia

Abstract
In the distance learning process, teachers, students, parents and institutions must continue
the teaching and learning process despite the various limitations. During the face-to-
face learning process, instructions, concepts and feedback can be verbally communicated
within a relatively short period of time; while teachers in the distance learning process
must briefly express their thoughts in written form so that every student can clearly
understand what is being done. It is not always an easy task. One of the challenges of
the distance learning process is to find ways how to provide feedback to students in a
timely and meaningful way to help them improve their performance, actively engage in
the learning process, and not to lose the link between a student and a teacher. The article,
using theoretical (scientific and methodological literature analysis) research methods,
analyzes the concept and theoretical models of the distance learning process, describes
the preconditions for feedback and the importance of feedback in the teaching and
learning process. By analysing the importance of feedback, suggestions for improving
the distance learning process have been developed.
Key words: distance learning, education for sustainable development, feedback, student,
teacher

Introduction
On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization announced that the
Covid-19 prevalence of coronaveral disease reached the extent of a global pandemic
(WHO, 2020). On March 12, 2020, the Latvian government decided to announce a
state of emergency in the country (Ministru kabineta rÓkojums Nr. 103, 2020). All
educational institutions were closed. Thus, distance learning or online learning became
the norm, and a number of national and international academic societies pooled resources
to ensure that student education at all education levels was continued at that time. A
distance learning process, as a learning system, has a major impact on different educa-
tional system participants, such as teachers, studentsí parents and institutions, which
need to continue the distance learning process, despite the various limitations. The con-
sequences are that all ñ teachers, students and parents ñ must be able to adapt to the use
of different electronic devices as teaching tools. In the short term, schools should develop
strategies or approaches for the distance learning process that are relevant to the capabi-
lities of each school, teacher, student, and cannot forget the instruments that support
 92 P‚vels Jurs and Elita –pehte

this policy. The habits of teachers, students and parents have changed with the beginning
of distance learning. Until now the teacher taught and students studied in the classroom ñ
the learning and teaching process took place in a school where all neccessary tools sup-
porting the learning process were in the same place. Learning process through e-learning
is very different from the overall learning that happens in schools. Teachers and students
do not communicate ìface-to-faceî directly, but via a variety of electronic devices to
establish communication on different Internet platforms. The transition from teaching
process at school to distance learning is not easy for all people. However, despite the
challenges and obstacles arising from e-learning, the learning process is continued. In
the current global challenges, there is an opportunity to discuss the objectives of sustain-
able development in education set by UNESCO ñ to develop competencies that enable
and empower individuals to reflect on their own actions by taking into account their
current and future social, cultural, economic and environmental impacts from both a
local and a global perspective. It requires individuals to act in complex situations in a
sustainable manner ñ to explore new ideas and approaches and participate in socio-
political processes, with the objective of moving their societies progressively towards
sustainable development. Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), understood
in this way aims to enable learners to take responsible actions that contribute towards
creating sustainable societies now and in the future. It ìdevelops the skills, values and
attitudes that enable citizens to lead healthy and fulfilled lives, make informed decisions,
and respond to local and global challengesî (UNESCO, 2016, IV). According to SalÓte
et al. (2021), the importance of incorporating sustainability ëcontentí into curricula by
adopting methodologies that encourage value education and the development of critical
thinking skills in education is a key that deepens the development of ideas on the pheno-
menon of sustainability, sustainable education and sustainable development (SalÓte et al.,
2021).
One of the tasks of the distance learning process is to find ways how to provide
information to students in a timely and meaningful manner. Although teachers can use
different written and audiovisual resources to provide content, the importance of com-
munication and feedback between the teacher and the student cannot be underestimated
(Hattie & Timperley, 2007). In the traditional learning process, teachers can include
feedback into their classroom immediately to avoid misunderstandings. They can also
answer questions and encourage students to build their awareness of feedback and engage
in the learning process. Although some of this can also be done in the distance learning
process, there is a lack of reading body language and visual assessment of studentsí
understanding. Feedback is an essential teaching practice in the distance learning process,
as it can help learn and establish a link between a teacher and a student, despite the fact
that they do not cooperate in presence (Bonnel et al., 2007; Leibold & Schwartz, 2015)
and promote the development of critical thinking, attitudes and active participation in
decision-making underpinning ESD (UNESCO, 2019).
The article, using theoretical (scientific and methodological analysis) research methods,
analyzes the concept and theoretical models of the distance learning process, describes
the preconditions for feedback and the importance of feedback in the teaching and
learning process. The theoretical research carried out makes it possible to achieve the
objective pursued by the article: by analyzing the importance of feedback, to formulate
suggestions for the development of the distance learning process.
 The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process 93

Analysis of the Concept of Distance Learning

Providing an understanding of theories and concepts related to a particular
topic or field is expected from the theory. As Herek (1995) points out, the theore-
tical system is:
— clearly said or written theoretical assumptions that allow the reader to critically
assess them;
— the theoretical frame that links the researcher to existing knowledge;
— the basis for the nomination of hypotheses and for the selection of exploration
methods using a relevant theory;
— the formulation of theoretical assumptions in the study that raise questions
about why and how. This allows for the transition from describing the observed
phenomenon to generalization on different aspects of this phenomenon;
— the theory that helps set the limits of these generalizations. The theoretical
frame indicates which major variables affect the phenomenon of interest. This
allows you to explore how these key variables can vary and under what kind
of circumstances (Herek, 1995).
E-learning is not something new in the education system. Hanson et al. (1997)
believe that the word ìdistanceî has a number of meanings and that the concept of
distance learning has been extended to a large number of different programs that serve
different audiences through a wide range of media and, finally, rapid technological
changes challenge traditional ways in which e-learning is defined. The general term
ìdistance learningî including various concepts was previously used to describe educa-
tion in an unconventional environment. For example, distance learning includes con-
cepts such as correspondence studies, home studies, independent studies, freelance
studies, distance learning, remote learning, but the terms are not synonymous (Keegan,
1996).
The concept of distance learning itself occurred at the University of Tubingen in
Germany. In the 1960s, researchers used the word ìfernstudiumî (distance learning) to
describe how individual practices were distributed in industry, particularly, technology
use and job sharing could be used in the learning process (Moore & Kearsley, 2012).
Distance education was defined as a set of learning methods creating learning habits
and printed, electronic, mechanical or other devices to facilitate communication between
a student and a teacher (Moore, 1972). Delling (1966) considered that distance learning
(Fernunterricht) was a planned and systematic activity, which involved the selection of
teaching materials, didactic preparation and presentation, as well as the monitoring
and support of students, and was achieved by using at least one suitable technical environ-
ment to eliminate the physical distance between the student and the teacher. Dohmen
(1967) believed that distance learning (Fernstudium) was a systematically organized
self-study in which a group of teachers was responsible for each student, consulted
them, taught and monitored the success of students. It was possible from a distance by
using tools that could overcome long distances (Dohmen, 1967). Peters (1973) described
distance learning (Fernunterricht) as a method for obtaining education from a distance.
Knowledge, skills and attitudes are streamlined through shared work and organizational
principles and through extensive use of technical media, particularly to reproduce high-
quality teaching materials that allow high numbers of students to be taught at the same
 94 P‚vels Jurs and Elita –pehte

time, regardless of their place of residence. It is a form of industrialized teaching and

learning (Peters, 1973). On the other hand, Holmberg (1977) defined distance learning
as a form of learning, which included all teaching methods and all levels of education
that did not have direct and independent supervision on the part of teachers, while
teachers could plan, organize and manage the educational process.
In 1988, Perraton proposed the following definition of distance learning: it is an
educational process in which someone leads a significant part of the learning process
and which takes place at a different location and distance from the student (Perraton,
1988). In 1990, Moore gave a different view of distance learning. According to his defi-
nition, distance learning is a way of providing teaching through printed or electronic
devices and a person who participates in planned learning and teaching process is at a
different place or at a different time from the teacherís location (Moore, 1990). A similar
definition was provided by Portway and Lane (1994), who considered that the concept
of distance learning referred to teaching and learning situations where the teacher and
students were geographically separate, and therefore electronic devices and printing
materials were used to provide teaching.
The US Distance Learning Association defines distance learning as ìthe process of
acquiring knowledge and skills through various tools to deliver information, including
all types of technology and different types of distance learningî (USDLA, 2004). Thus,
distance learning is an educational state that requires communication between a teacher
and a student through usage of modern audiovisual communication technologies. Online
learning can also be defined as a learning experience in a synchronous or asynchronous
environment by using different devices and tools (e.g., mobile phones, tablets, laptops).
With the Internet access, students can be anywhere and study, communicate with teachers,
and share ideas with other students (Singh & Thurman, 2019).
In November 2020 amendments were made in the Education Law of Latvia, where
Section 1 was supplemented with the definition that ìdistance learning is the form of
the acquisition of education in which an educatee acquires the contents of an educational
programme implemented by an educational institution independently and individually,
using specially structured study materials offered by the educational institution, different
technical and electronic means of communication. Achievements of the educatee are
assessed according to the requirements of the relevant educational programmeî (Educa-
tion Law, 1998).
To sum up, it can be said that it is difficult to define the concept of ìdistance
learningî and to determine how qualitative the definition is. There is no universal way
to say how to describe the quality of education and the distance learning process because
each concept contains very complex other concepts that depend on a variety of factors,
such as technology, curriculum characteristics, students, teaching design, etc. (Meyer,
2002).

Theoretical Models of the Distance Learning Process

Four of the most influential distance learning theories can be found in the works of
Holmberg, Peters, Moore and Garrison (Table 1).
 The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process 95

Table 1
Theoretical Models of the Distance Learning Process
Author Model Concept
Bˆrje Holmberg Distance learning Motivation, empathy, communi-
communication model cation, educational autonomy
Michael Graham Moore Transactional distance and Dialogue and structure,
learner autonomy studentsí autonomy
Otto Peters Distance education as the most Division of work, instructions,
industrialized form of education self-training
Randy Garrison Communication and learner Cooperation, self-guided
control learning

Holmberg (1986; 1989), as a leading theorist in distance learning and distance

learning education, developed a philosophy on a distance learning communication model
influenced by the theory of humanism and andragogy. His theory described as a ìpredic-
ting theoryî uses a teaching methodology based on teaching and learning communication
styles and applies ìempathetic emotionsî (Bernath & Vidal, 2007). Holmberg published
his ideas for the first time in an article ìThe Techniques of Correspondence Teachersî
in 1960 and mentioned that a didactic conversation was based on his theory. He stressed
that his approach to distance learning was based on a very general observation that
personal feelings of empathy and personal relationships between students and teachers
supported learning motivation and improved learning outcomes (Holmberg, 1960). He
emphasized that the content of course materials and the nature of negotiations were a
means of promoting the independence of students. Holmbergís theory focused on pro-
moting student support and encouragement through clear instructions. He was the first
theorist who focused on the importance of personal aspects in distance learning and the
importance of empathy as an essential ingredient in teacher and student interaction
(Holmberg, 1986, 1989). To sum up, in his theory Holmberg tries to explain the relation-
ship between two-way communication and the effectiveness of distance learning and
teaching. Such relationships include interaction, emotional engagement, learning pleasure,
motivation and teaching effectiveness. Holmberg believes that the dialogue between a
student and a teacher is the most characteristic feature in distance learning and the
circumstance that promotes learning.
Mooreís transactional distance theory was introduced in the early 1970s. It highlights
one of the problems ñ the separation of a student and a teacher from one another. He
turns to the nature of ìdistanceî within distance learning and its impact on teaching and
learning relationships. The distance refers to the communical and psychological distance
between students and teachers, which is considered to be more relevant than the physical
separation between the teacher and the student. To overcome the distance, there must
be two variables in the training process: (I) dialogue (targeted, constructive interaction
assessed by each participant towards better understanding) and (II) structure (rigidities
or flexibility in relation to course objectives, evaluation or evaluation strategies and
types). In all teaching and learning relationships, the distance level depends on whether
students remain alone with their materials, whether they can communicate with their
teacher (dialogue), and the degree to which the programme is preconceived and defined
(structure) (Moore, 1994).
 96 P‚vels Jurs and Elita –pehte

Peters (1967, 1989) highlights the role of distance learning as an industrialized

form of teaching and learning. He thinks that distance education is characterized by
job-sharing and the development of briefing units that could be mass-produced and
delivered in a standardized way, thereby achieving substantial savings. The specialist
group develops, supplies and supports the concept of distance learning; the final product
is an educated individual. This view of distance learning was considered to be contro-
versial and limited because it did not address important issues related to communication
and interaction in the field of education. Garison, for example, notes that this is not a
teaching or learning theory but an idea of organizing distance learning. The focus on
structural and organizational issues in distance learning has had a significant impact on
future studies (Garrison, 2000). Peters (1993, 1998, 2000) then addressed the issue of
the role of distance education in the postindustrial community. He states that distance
learning is consistent with postindustrial trends in classroom dislocation, self-directing,
student social interaction and relationships with electronic devices. According to this
opinion, the main objective of education will be self-fulfilment, and autonomous groups
will be the main part of the educational process. Peters (2000) predicts that, in response
to the opportunities and lifelong learning requirements of new technologies, all univer-
sities will be transformed into self-education and distance learning institutions.
Garrison and Bayntonís established control theory says the concept and practice of
distance learning is an individual form of learning based on self-learning (Garrison &
Baynton, 1997). Garisonís approach places emphasis on direct communication between
teachers and students and interaction between school groups and a teacher. Interaction
means that a student develops and maintains control. Control does not require a form
of self-reliance that excludes all external interaction and resources, rather by means of
communication, the student and the teacher can agree on the degree of control that
each has over the learning process. Control is basically collaboration because it depends
on both the teacher and the student, although it exists separately from each other.
Control is not automatically transferred to the student, freedom of choice in terms of
school time and place is given to the student, without taking into account the capacity
and resources of the student. Control is constantly debated thanks to continued inter-
action (Garrison, 1989). Garisonís theoretical work also deals with the relationship
between theory and the development of different distance learning paradigms. He believes
that, along with the prevailing paradigm in distance learning that has highlighted inde-
pendent learning, which is conducted mainly through self-learning, is what can be called
the future paradigm of distance learning. This paradigm places much greater emphasis
on interaction and knowledge building and is consistent with constructivist approaches
about distance learning (Garrison, 2000).

Content and Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process

There are many studies on the positive effects of feedback on studentsí learning,
achievements and motivation (Epstein et al., 2002; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Narciss &
Huth, 2004; Price et al., 2010; Shute, 2008). In the distance learning process, where
there is rather limited scope for interaction, the feedback from teachers on learning
performance plays an even more important role than in the ìface-to-faceî process, since
it can help manage the learning process, improve performance and maintain motivation
(Hyland, 2001). Boud and Molloy (2013) also agree with this statement, and they argue
 The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process 97

that feedback from students on feedback provided by teachers is also important. The
manifestation of teachersí and studentsí feelings can be seen as feedback that cannot be
overlooked, as recent studies highlight the role of emotions in all learning contexts
(Martínez & Agudo, 2018; Pekrun & Stephens, 2010). Chetwynd and Dobbyn (2011)
note that effective feedback is crucial in the distance learning process, where comments
on performance can be the key or even the only communication between a teacher and
a student. There are differences between providing feedback in the learning process in
the classroom and in the distance learning process. The distance between teaching and
learning activities and the devices are necessary to reduce this gap among the most
frequently mentioned differences between teaching in the classroom and from a distance
(Bernard et al., 2009). Tsagari thinks that distance education is linked to problems and
opportunities that are not covered in the ìface-to-faceî context. For example, students
in distance learning have more opportunities to choose content and how they learn,
they have more freedom in choosing tasks and teaching materials, and they have the
opportunity to ignore activities that they do not consider useful for their own develop-
ment. On the other hand, distance learning creates problems that do not appear in the
context of the classroom, such as initial motivation for students, providing access to
real-time interaction and developing studentsí awareness of their learning speed and
direction (Tsagari, 2013). MirÌe et al. (2019) have come to a conclusion that the learning
path in the e-course should be customized, taking into account learnersí socio-demo-
graphic parameters and online learning readiness rate. In a self-paced e-learning course,
the system should select the on-boarding materials for each learner, based on the data
obtained from learnersí self-evaluation during enrolment in the course. Later, during
the course, short self-evaluation forms should be built-in to follow the learnersí path
and progress.
Canning (2013) gathers the value of feedback, explaining its importance to both
teachers and students. Teachers should be able to provide students with qualitative
feedback, while students should be able to understand and use it effectively. No matter
how capable a student is, they will not be able to use poor-quality feedback to improve
their performance. Many studies in recent decades have demonstrated the importance
of effective feedback in supporting learning (Bangert, 2004; Carless, 2006; Nicol &
Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). In an article about seven principles of good practice, Chikering
and Gamson (1987) write that feedback is an important element in the learning process
and it helps learn and improve performance. They believe that feedback includes assess-
ment and immediate comments, it allows students to assess existing knowledge, rethink
what they have learned and what they still need to learn, and get suggestions for future
job improvement. Dialogue with the student not only promotes motivation, but also
encourages the development of sustainable education. In this perspective, it is important
to allow for critical thinking and the formulation of studentsí position. It takes time to
think about transforming the experience into knowledge and something meaningful.
However, feedback has many different forms. It can be a continuous and unconscious
dialogue or structured discussion with others. Teacher can also vary these shapes. The
essential means of providing and obtaining feedback are listening, speaking, writing
and creative reasoning. Documenting what is and was done by raising questions and
evaluating critically is a valuable feedback tool and an important part of the learning
process (Mendela et al., 2008).
 98 P‚vels Jurs and Elita –pehte

Although scientists have made recommendations to improve the quality and effecti-
veness of feedback, it is not possible to find a specific description of effective feedback.
There are a number of researchers who have described the criteria for effective feedback.
Howard (1987) argues that for feedback to be effective, four important criteria should
be taken into account:
— content of feedback: provides accurate information on the correct and incorrect
answers; there should be accurate information indicating skills and knowledge.
The feedback should be specific and should indicate both the evaluated per-
formance and the learnerís proven capabilities;
— the degree to which feedback is individualized, the extent to which performance
is to be assessed individually. The higher the number of responses, the more
the opportunity to assess and provide more individualized feedback;
— timely feedback is more effective than delayed, so it is recommended to give
immediate feedback;
— feedback sources and delivery method: these two parameters are interre-
lated and have a significant impact on the possibilities of all other feedback
criterias. For example, feedback provided by your computer automatically
gives you information about the performance of a particular person ñ it is
personalized, fast, but it provides limited information. On the other hand,
feedback to group conferences and seminars is immediate, more individua-
lized, and more exhaustive, as each student can ask different questions about
different content. The delivery method also determines the source of feedback.
It is possible for teachers and students to provide immediate feedback to live
conferences, but this is the case for automatic, computer-generated feedback
(Howard, 1987).
Howardís list outlines not the specific characteristics that should be associated
with feedback, but the feedback components that teachers should care about when
creating it.
Hyland (2001) thinks that motivation may be the most important feature of effective
feedback in the context of distance learning. This emphasis on motivation was also
reflected in the Coleís et al. (1986) study on effective feedback in the context of distance
learning. According to the researchers, feedback in the distance learning process should
be supportive, it should provide encouraging comments and also offer opportunities for
a dialogue, as well as the possibility of commenting on feedback. In addition to putting
emphasis on the motivating aspect of feedback, the specific features of distance learning
have led some authors to assume that feedback in the distance learning process requires
more clarity compared to the feedback from the learning process in school, as it should
be noted that the distance learning process does not provide as many opportunities for
diverse interaction between teachers and students. Price (1997) argues that students
and teachers in the distance learning process need a crystal-clear explanation of the
assessment criteria and when and how they are used. In addition, Price points out that
the tone and word selection of feedback comments are essential for feedback effectiveness,
as distance learners have limited opportunities to understand a teacherís sense of humor
and commenting style (Price, 1997). To sum up, it can be concluded that feedback in
the distance learning process:
 The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process 99

— helps improve studentsí learning process, thereby allowing them to achieve

their goals and progress (Adcroft, 2011);
— motivates students to improve their present and future performance, while
also highlighting their strengths and weaknesses (Weaver, 2006);
— creates opportunities for a dialogue between the teacher and the student (Beau-
mont et al., 2011);
— promotes reflection and self-regulation, thereby encouraging the autonomy
of learners (Espasa & Meneses, 2010).
Based on literature review, it can be concluded that effective feedback is important
for both the classroom and distance learning processes. Although there are diffe-
rences between providing effective feedback in the ìface-to-faceî process and in the
distance learning process, there are characteristic elements that should be taken into
account when providing feedback in both the ìface-to-faceî and distance learning
processes:
— timely ñ to provide feedback as long as it is up to date (it should be provided
quickly enough to make it useful for students and to improve their performance)
(Bailey & Garner, 2010; Costello & Crane, 2010; Evans, 2013; Glover &
Brown, 2006; Rodway-Dyer et al., 2010);
— clear (unambiguous) ñ it means that feedback is understandable to students,
is linked to learning outcomes (constructive harmonization) and to evaluation
criteria (Costello & Crane, 2010; Evans, 2013; Lizzio & Wilson, 2008);
— educative, not only evaluative ñ identifies the learning needs and/or previous
knowledge of students and it can detect unpredicted results achieved (Cos-
tello & Crane, 2010; Evans, 2013; Lizzio & Wilson, 2008);
— proportional (criteria, goals) ñ feedback is provided on key task assessment
goals (Boud, 2000; Davies, 2003; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Nicol & Mac-
farlane-Dick, 2006; Stefani, 1994);
— indicative, i.e., related to the performance of the student ñ feedback points to
the target (replenishment) and clarifies what the student has done well and
what is not so good (Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Bailey & Garner, 2010);
— forecasting, i.e., feedback suggest what the student can productively improve
in the future (Hattie & Timperley, 2007);
— ongoing, i.e., a continuous dialogue than the final outcome ñ feedback is
provided sufficiently frequently and in a detailed manner, it supports a peer/
teacher dialogue, allows students to provide their feedback on the feedback
received and supports raising questions. Instead of the end point of teaching
and learning processes, feedback should be seen as an invitation and starting
point for communication between students to further develop skills and ideas
in negotiations with teachers (Bailey & Garner, 2010);
— sensitive ñ feedback should reflect the context and history of each student,
emotional contribution and needs and capacity (Costello & Crane, 2010).
Feedback should contribute to the development of positive self-confidence and
motivation (see Fig. 1).
 100 P‚vels Jurs and Elita –pehte

Figure 1
Elements of the Feedback

To sum up, it can be considered that effective feedback in the distance learning
process can provide the student with the support mechanisms necessary for the active
involvement of the student in the learning process. In a distance learning environment,
feedback may have a positive impact on students by promoting responsibility for the
acquisition of the material and by establishing a dialogue on feedback and evaluation
which, by its nature, helps the student engage actively in the learning process and not to
be a passive observer.

Suggestions
1. In order to facilitate the development of positive self-awareness and motivation in
the distance learning process, teachers should provide feedback to help improve
learning among students, indicating what the student has achieved, what needs to
be improved and what to do to improve performance, thereby enabling the student
to achieve goals and progress.
2. The use of modern technologies provides new opportunities to meet individual
learning needs. By using technologies (voice records, drafts, computer-generated
feedback etc.), teachers can provide and students can receive personalized feedback
and less time resources are consumed.
3. The feedback provided should be simple, understandable to the student, which
clarifies the learning needs and/or previous knowledge of students and should be
timely, that is to say, to provide feedback while it is important for the student. The
feedback should be sensitive to the student.
4. Students should involve in the feedback a dialogue in the distance learning process,
so that students are active and not passive beneficiaries of feedback. Moreover, if
 The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process 101

students become more independent, rely on self-directed learning and rely less on
teacher leadership, a dialogue is developed where students themselves act as evaluators,
using peer assessment or self-assessment.
5. In order to improve the effectiveness of feedback, students should provide their
feedback on the feedback provided by the teacher.
6. It would be advisable for studens to document how they used feedback to move to
the next phase of training. This strategy provides additional benefits through the
development of studentsí metacognitive skills and a more active involvement of
students in the learning process.

Conclusions
The analysis of theoretical models of the distance learning process gives an idea of
conceptual categories, philosophy and origin, which allow developing new theories
and, consequently, improving the distance learning process, both theoretically and prac-
tically. Distance learning is a way in which a student participates in the planned learning
process but the student is at a place or time, which differs from the place of the teacher,
and uses different media. Distance learning is very different from the face-to-face learning
at school. Teachers and students do not communicate directly, but via a variety of elec-
tronic devices to establish communication on different Internet platforms. The transition
from the face-to-face to distance learning is not easy for people. However, despite the
challenges and obstacles arising from e-learning, the learning process is ongoing.
Feedback in the distance learning process is a tool that involves students in the
learning process, promoting responsibility for learning achievements and participation.
Dialogue between students and teachers improves the performance of students, so that
the student is at the center of the learning process as an active participant.
As sustainable development becomes more and more relevant in society, process
and dialogue-oriented learning, especially if there are no answers to all issues at once,
leads both students and teachers to constantly think, raise questions and use diverse
thinking patterns, which promote meaningful use of feedback in the learning process.
Feedback is of high importance in professional advancement, social interaction and
education for global development. Schools have to meet the challenge of using the fast-
growing supply of technical and pedagogical media (study platforms, digital textbooks
and study material) to open up opportunities for individualized and communicative
lessons within a lifeworld-oriented education for global development. This does not
only require critical openness and the appropriate staff, but also affects the whole school
system. To date, education for sustainable development has been promoting knowledge,
skills, values and attitudes that empower learners to take informed decisions and res-
ponsible actions. Through education for sustainable development and distance learning,
there is a need to continue the dialogue between sustainable development and educa-
tion.
Further studies should deal with the role of feedback in the distance learning process,
the impact of the dialogue between students and teachers on studentís achievements
and satisfaction with the learning outcomes, as well as the quality of the distance learning
process.
 102 P‚vels Jurs and Elita –pehte

References
Adcroft, A. (2011). The mythology of feedback. Higher Education Research and Develop-
ment, 30(4), 405ñ419. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.526096
Bailey, R., & Garner, M. (2010). Is the feedback in higher education assessment worth
the paper it is written on? Teachersí reflections on their practices. Teaching in
Higher Education, 15(2), 187ñ198. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562511003620019
Bangert, A. (2004). The seven principles of good practice: A framework for evaluating
on-line teaching. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(3), 217ñ232.
Beaumont, C., OíDoherty, M., & Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment
feedback: A key to improving student learning? Studies in Higher Education, 36(6),
671ñ687. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075071003731135
Bernard, M. R., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A.,
& Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in
distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243ñ1289.
Bernath, U., & Vidal, M. (2007). The theories and the theorists: Why theory is important
for research. Distances et savoirs, 5(3), 427ñ458.
Bonnel, W., Ludwig, C., & Smith, J. (2007). Providing feedback in online courses:
What do students want? How do we do that? Annual Review of Nursing Education,
6, 205ñ221.
Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for a learning society.
Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151ñ167. https://doi.org/10.1080/713695728
Boud, B., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge
of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698ñ712.
Canning, J. (2013). Feedback: A short academic literature review. http://blog.soton.ac.uk/
gmoof/files/2013/07/Feedback-literature-review2.pdf
Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher
Education, 31(2), 219ñ233.
Chetwynd, F., & Dobbyn, C. (2011). Assessment, feedback and marking guides in
distance education. Open Learning, 26(1), 67ñ78.
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in
undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 3ñ7.
Cole, S., Coates, M., & Lentell, H. (1986). Towards good teaching by correspondence.
Open Learning, 1(1), 16ñ22. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268051860010105
Costello, J., & Crane, D. (2010). Providing learner-centered feedback using a variety of
technologies. Paper presented at the International Conference on the Liberal Arts,
St. Thomas University, Fredericton, New Brunswick. https://www.stu.ca/media/
stu/site-content/about/publications/2010-conference-on-the-liberal-arts/Providing-
Learner-centered-Feedback-Using-a-Variety-of-Technologies.pdf
Davies, P. (2003). Closing the communications loop on the computerized peer-assessment
of essays. Research in Learning Technology, 11(1), 41ñ54. https://doi.org/10.3402/
rlt.v11i1.11266
Delling, R. (1966). Versuch der Grundlegung zu einer systematischen Theorie des Fernun-
terrichts [Attempt to lay the foundations for a systematic theory of distance learning].
In L. Sroka (Ed.), Fernunterricht (pp. 181ñ211). Hamburger Fernlehrinstitut.
Dohmen, G. (1967). Das Fernstudium, Ein neues padagogisches Forschungsund Arbeits-
feld [Distance learning, a new pedagogical research and field of work]. DIFF.
 The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process 103

Epstein, M. L., Lazarus, A. D., Calvano, T. B., Matthews, K. A., Hendel, R. A.,
Epstein, B. B., & Brosvic, G. M. (2002). Immediate feedback assessment technique
promotes learning and corrects inaccurate first responses. The Psychological Record,
52(2), 187ñ201.
Espasa, A., & Meneses, J. (2010). Analysing feedback processes in an online teaching
and learning environment: An exploratory study. Higher Education, 59(3), 277ñ
292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9247-4
Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of
Educational Research, 83(1), 70ñ120. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312474350
Garrison, D. R., & Baynton, M. (1987). Beyond independence in distance education:
The concept of control. The American Journal of Distance Education, 1(3), 3ñ15.
Garrison, D. R. (1989). Understanding distance education: A framework for the future.
Routledge.
Garrison, D. R. (2000). Theoretical challenges for distance education in the 21st century:
A shift from structural to transactional issues. International Review of Research in
Open and Distance Learning, 1(1). http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/
view/2/22
Glover, C., & Brown, E. (2006). Written feedback for students: Too much, too detailed
or too incomprehensible to be effective? Bioscience Education, 7(3). https://doi.org/
10.3108/beej.2006.07000004
Hanson, D., Maushak, N. J., Schlosser, C. A., Anderson, M. L., Sorenson, C. & Simon-
son, M. (1997). Distance education: Review of the literature (2nd ed.). Association
for Educational Communications and Technology. Research Institute for Studies
in Education.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational
Research, 77(1), 81ñ112.
Herek, G. (1995). Developing a theoretical framework and rationale for a research pro-
posal. In W. Pequegnat & E. Stover (Eds.), How to write a successful research grant
application: A guide for social and behavioral scientists (pp. 85ñ91). Kluwer.
Holmberg, B. (1960). On the methods of teaching by correspondence. C. W. K. Gleerup.
Holmberg, B. (1977). Distance education: A survey and bibliography. ERIC.
Holmberg, B. (1986). Growth and structure of distance education. Croom Helm.
Holmberg, B. (1989). Theory and practice of distance education. Routledge.
Howard, D. C. (1987). Designing learner feedback in distance education. The American
Journal of Distance Education, 1(3), 24ñ40.
Hyland, K. (2001). Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic writing.
Written Communication, 18, 549ñ574.
IzglÓtÓbas likums [Education Law]. (1998). https://likumi.lv/ta/id/50759-izglitibas-likums
Keegan, D. (Ed.) (1996). Foundations of distance education (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Leibold, N., & Schwartz, L. M. (2015). The art of giving online feedback. The Journal
of Effective Teaching, 15(1), 34ñ46.
Lizzio, A., & Wilson, K. (2008). Feedback on assessment: Studentsí perceptions of
quality and effectiveness. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3),
263ñ275.
Martínez Agudo, J. de D. (2018). Introduction and overview. In J. de D. Martínez
Agudo (Ed.), Emotions in second language teaching. Theory, research and teacher
education (pp. 1ñ16). Springer.
 104 P‚vels Jurs and Elita –pehte

Mendela, M., Puhovska, M., Zielka, S., Sagana, I., SadovÚika, A., Dimnicka, M. (...)
Ridens, L. (2008). IzglÓtÓba p‚rmaiÚ‚m: IlgtspÁjÓgas attÓstÓbas m‚cÓanas un m‚cÓ-
an‚s rokasgr‚mata [Education for change: A Handbook for teaching and learning
sustainable development]. Vides vÁstis.
Meyer, K. A. (2002). Quality in distance education: Focus on on-line learning. In
A. J. Kezar (Ed.), ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Vol. 29 (pp. 1ñ134).
Jossey ñ Bass.
Ministru kabineta rÓkojums Nr. 103 [Cabinet Regulation No 103]. Par ‚rk‚rtÁj‚s situ‚-
cijas izsludin‚anu [On the declaration of a state of emergency]. RÓg‚, 2020. gada
12. mart‚ (prot. Nr. 11 1. ß). https://www.vestnesis.lv/op/2020/51A.1
MirÌe, E., Cakula, S., & Tzivian, L. (2019). Measuring teachers-as-learnersí digital
skills and readiness to study online for successful e-learning experience. Journal of
Teacher Education for Sustainability, 21(2), 5ñ12. https://doi.org/10.2478/jtes-2019-
0013
Moore, M. G. (1972). Learner autonomy: The second dimension of independent learning.
Convergence, 5(2), 76ñ88.
Moore, M. (1990). Background and overview of contemporary American distance
education. In M. Moore (Ed.), Contemporary issues in American distance education
(pp. 12ñ26). Pergamon.
Moore, M. G. (1994) Autonomy and interdependence. The American Journal of Distance
Education, 8(2), 1ñ4.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. Wadsworth.
Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2004). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multi-
media learning. In H. M. Niegemann, D. Leutner, & R. Brunken (Eds.), Instructional
design for multimedia learning (pp. 181ñ195). Waxmann.
Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated
learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher
Education, 31(2), 199ñ218.
Pekrun, R., & Stephens, E. J. (2010). Achievement emotions: A control-value approach.
Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(4), 238ñ255.
Perraton, H. (1988). A theory for distance education. In D. Stewart, D. Keegan, &
B. Holmberg (Eds.), Distance education: International perspectives (pp. 34ñ45).
Routledge.
Peters, O. (1967). Distance education and industrial production: A comparative interpre-
tation in outline. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Otto Peters on distance education. The industri-
alization of teaching and learning (pp. 107ñ127). Routledge Studies in Distance
Education.
Peters, O. (1973). Die Didaktische Struktur des Fernunterrichts [The didactic structure
of distance learning]. Beltz.
Peters, O. (1993). Distance education in a post-industrial society. In D. Keegan (Ed.),
Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 220ñ240). Routledge.
Peters, O. (1998). Learning and teaching in distance education. Analyses and interpre-
tations from an international perspective. Kogan Page.
Peters, O. (2000). The transformation of the university into an institution of higher
learning. In T. Evans & S. Nation (Eds.), Changing university teaching: Reflections
on creating educational technologies (pp. 10ñ23). Kogan Page.
 The Role of Feedback in the Distance Learning Process 105

Portway, P., & Lane, C. (Eds.). (1994). Guide to teleconferencing and distance learning.
Applied Business Communications.
Price, B. (1997). Defining quality student feedback in distance learning. Journal of
Advances Learning, 26(1), 154ñ160.
Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J., & OíDonovan, B. (2010). Feedback: All that effort,
but what is the effect? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(3),
277ñ289.
Rodway-Dyer, S., Knight, J., & Dunne, E. (2010). A case study on audio feedback with
geography undergraduates. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 35(2),
217ñ231.
SalÓte, I., Fjodorova, I., & Ivanova, O. (2021). Does the JTES help us create deeper
personal meanings for sustainable education? Journal of Teacher Education for
Sustainability, 22(2), 1ñ6. https://doi.org/10.2478/jtes-2020-0012
Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78,
3ñ32.
Singh, V., & Thurman, A. (2019). How many ways can we define online learning? A
systematic literature review of definitions of online learning. American Journal of
Distance Education, 33, 289ñ306. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2019.1663082
Stefani, L. A. J. (1994). Peer, self and tutor assessment: Relative reliabilities. Studies in
Higher Education, 19(1), 69ñ75.
Tsagari, D. (2013). Contact sessions in distance education: Studentsí perspective. In
N. Lavidas, T. Alexiou, & M. Sougari (Eds), Major trends in theoretical and applied
linguistics: Selected papers from the 20th ISTAL (International Symposium on Theo-
retical and Applied Linguistics), vol. 3 (pp. 385ñ405). Versita de Gruyter.
UNESCO. (2016). Education 2030. Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action.
Towards inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning for all.
UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245656
UNESCO. (2019). Framework for the implementation of Education for Sustainable
Development (ESD) beyond 2019. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/
pf0000370215
USDLA (US American Distance Education Association). (2004). Definition of distance
learning. http://www.usdla.org
Weaver, M. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutorsí written
responses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(3), 379ñ394.
WHO. (2020). Director-Generalís opening remarks at the media briefing on
COVID-19 ñ 11 March 2020. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/
who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19ó11-
march-2020

Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Pavels Jurs, Dr. paed.,
Prof., Liepaja University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Liela iela 4, Liepaja,
LV-3401. Email: pavels.jurs@liepu.lv

View publication stats