From informal to formal - A case study about the impact of distant learning on formative feedback in Danish schools

Abstract

Even though Denmark is a highly digitized country, the COVID-19 pandemic has pushed schools to adopt extreme forms of distant learning, as everything should be conducted online through digital platforms. Our study aims at analysing the impact of distant learning practice on feedback practice, from the perspective of teachers and pupils. More specifically we focus on pupils in Danish mid-school, who are subject to a final exam to qualify for access to high school. We have conducted a netnographic inquiry, combining virtual observations and interviews with teachers and pupils. Our results show that the new distant learning practice prevented teachers to engage in non-formal assessment and feedback practice, such as spontaneous walks across the classrooms and dialogue with pupils on their difficulties, hence making it hard to keep an overview on their pupils’ progress. To compensate for the lack of non-formal feedback practices, distant learning has turned feedback practices into formal evaluations, leading the pupils to feel under pressure and less engaged in their learning. Our study provides an original perspective regarding specific aspects, such as feedback practices, which require forms of spontaneous dialogue between teachers and pupils and are central for learning, hence providing meaningful insights for the implementation of distant learning in mid school and the importance of a close dialogue between pupils and teachers.

Keywords

Covid-19 distant learning digital platforms assessment feedback practice

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced educators and researchers to rethink the role of digital technologies in pedagogical processes. Even though Denmark is one of the most digitized countries in the world (Hjelholt and Schou, 2017), Danish teachers were not prepared to adopt exclusive distant learning practices. Nonetheless, the Danish Act on Compulsory Education [Folkeskolen] requires evaluations of pupils’ learning outcomes (Ministry of Children & Education, 2020a), and the teachers are committed to documenting the pupils’ knowledge and skills through different evaluation methods (Berg et al., 2020; Ministry of Children and Education, 1993).

In this article, we examine how feedback processes between teachers and Danish pupils (ages 13–16) were reshaped in lieu of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns of 2020-21. During the second lockdown (January-May 2021), we collected netnographic data through virtual observations and focus group interviews, with pupils and teachers, to investigate how the pupils and their regular use of learning platforms were challenged by the adoption of distant learning alone, in relation to assessment and feedback practices.

In section 2 we elaborate on the theoretical framework used throughout this article, building on Illeris’ framework (2006) and his theoretical approach to learning. In section 3 we present our methodology, in section 4 we discuss how distant learning has reconfigured learning spaces and feedback processes analyzing our data based on our theoretical framework (introduced in section 2). In sections 5 and 6 we discuss our findings, which suggest that the newly established physical distance disrupted the teachers’ understanding of the academic level of each individual pupil, work ethic, and motivations, and thereby the teacher’s ability to convey qualified feedback.

Theory

The COVID-19 pandemic and global school lockdowns have forced teachers to rethink the role that digital technologies play in pedagogical processes. Denmark is seen as one of the most digitized countries in the world (Hjelholt and Schou, 2017), however, the digitalization of the Danish school system has never experienced a rapid transition from physical to distant learning, and teachers were lacking relevant knowledge and experience to make it work. In this section we introduce the theoretical framework of our study, starting from background information regarding the Danish school system, with particular attention to the role of feedback and formative evaluation, and then we will discuss learning theories by Illeris (2006) about learning processes, dimensions, and spaces.

The Danish school system and feedback practices

In Denmark, children must attend 10 years of compulsory education (through lower secondary school), starting from the year when the child turns six. Danish compulsory education can rely upon a rather extensive and safe digital infrastructure, supported by a joint public digital strategy, which has been ratified by the EU, the Danish government, the municipalities, and regions. The primary purpose of this strategy is to support public schools in their use of learning digital tools (Danish Government, The Municipalities’ Main Organization, and Danish Regions, 2016).

The National Agency aims at implementing and extending the use of digital content management systems and learning platforms: such as Aula, MinUddannelse, Meebook, etc., to promote ICT didactics and facilitate innovative teaching practice, including evaluation methods. This is done according to the Danish Act on Compulsory Education [Folkeskolen], stating that evaluations of pupils’ learning outcomes are mandatory (Ministry of Children & Education, 2020b). These digital learning platforms are used in Denmark to ensure that pupils, parents, and teachers have access to bilateral and multilateral communication, study plans, study portfolios, digital tools, teaching aids, and other relevant content for the pupils to work with (Gynther & Jørnø, 2019). These platforms provide a combination of physical portfolios, chalkboards, and bulletin boards in a digital form. Moreover, the teachers must be able to see, plan, evaluate, save, and share learning processes based on Common goals¹ [Fælles Mål], and more concrete learning goals. Therefore, the digital learning platform contains and collects data about pupils’ progression (The Danish Evaluation Institute, 2016a), to support the different phases of the learning process: preparation, completion, evaluation, and sharing (Jørnø and Gynther, 2018).

During COVID-19, digital learning platforms have become the only blackboard, which teachers use to divide pupils into groups, communicate learning tasks and evaluate their individual and group-based work. Consequently, digital infrastructure and fundamental proficiency in the use of ICT were necessary during the transition from physical to distant learning, however, the transition happened overnight and teachers lacked specific experience (Andersen et al., 2020). According to a report from The Danish Evaluation Institute, the implementation of digital resources and strategies requires multi-stranded development, which is both long-lasting and close to practice (The Danish Evaluation Institute, 2016). However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the global transition into distant learning for many countries, the development of strategies for implementing digital learning practices and resources was acute and improvised.

Over the last 30 years (Andersen, 2020; Berg et al., 2020) assessment methods have been part of teachers’ professional toolbox, providing a foundation for the development and improvement of teaching. However, in recent years the focus has shifted from assessment to the pupils’ learning outcome (Andersen, 2020; Berg et al., 2020):

“[…] Common goals are national goals describing what the pupils must learn during their years in compulsory education in relation to subjects and topics. […] Consequently, learning goals are articulated as the pupils' learning outcome instead of the content of the teaching […]” (Ministry of Children & Education, 2020a).

Consequently, teachers are expected to document the pupils’ knowledge and skill development through various assessment forms (Berg et al., 2020), documented through digital learning platforms.

During the COVID-19 lockdown, these assessment methods were difficult to maintain, as teachers were struggling to follow their pupils’ learning process while being confined to their respective homes (The Danish Evaluation Institute, 2021). Therefore, alternative but familiar assessment methods were adopted, challenging both teachers and pupils.

The learning triangle: How processes and dimensions affect learning

Our study builds on constructivism, stating that learning cannot be transferred unchanged from teacher to pupil (Andersen, 2020). Learning is an active process, where knowledge and skills are recreated in a new context. Therefore, the learners will decide if the information communicated by the teacher is of interest and will make a difference, and thereby it is transferred into either knowledge or skills (Gynther, 2005).

From a teaching perspective, the learner (the pupil) needs to be activated through hands-on engagement, involving concrete problem-solving tasks, experiments, and other activities that lead to personalization or construction of new knowledge for the pupil (Andersen, 2020).

Illeris (2006) argues that learning involves a change that is to some extent permanent until superimposed by new learning or gradually lost through forgetting. This process is also not necessarily dependent on the individual’s maturation, as according to Illeris, learning is always embedded in a social and cultural context, which provides impulses for and sets the framework for what can be learned and how.

Illeris also argues that all learning involves two very different processes, and both need to be activated for us to learn (Illeris, 2006). The first process is the interaction between the individual and his environment, which takes place throughout our waking hours, and of which we can be more or less aware, whereby attention becomes an important factor of importance for learning. This process is fundamentally biological in nature, therefore, it excludes any kind of perception of learning as a filling process, where someone (e.g., a teacher) transfers knowledge and skills to the individual (Illeris, 2006). The second process, the acquisition process, is the individual psychological processing and acquisition that happens from impulses and influences that the interaction implies, and it is fundamental to interpersonal and societal interaction (Illeris, 2006: 36). Acquisition typically has the character of linking the new impulses, influences, and results of relevant previous learning (Illeris, 2006). The two processes described by Illeris are supported by his theory on all learning involving three dimensions: Content, incentive, and environment, as described through his learning triangle (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Knud Illeris’ learning triangle (2006).

The dimension of content is mainly about the content that is learned. This dimension evolves the learner’s insights, abilities, and understanding of specific topics (Illeris, 2006).

The incentive dimension constitutes motivation, feelings, and willpower in relation to the acquisition process. This dimension points to the importance of mobilizing the mental energy, which learning needs. This mobilization can be rooted in factors such as uncertainty, curiosity, or unmet needs, which in this way cause the individual to seek out new knowledge, understanding, or new skills.

The content and incentive dimensions are developed from a common whole and work in close mutual interaction (Illeris, 2006). According to Illeris, there will always be a question of how the incentive dimension will influence the learning outcome, even if it does not affect the perceived content itself – and vice versa.

The interaction dimension concerns the individual’s interaction with the social and cultural world, which applies on two levels: First, the close, social level where the interaction situation takes place (e.g., in a classroom), and second the overall cultural level that sets the conditions for the interaction. In this way, the interaction dimension contributes to the development of the learner’s sociality, i.e., the ability to engage and function appropriately in various forms of social interaction between people (Illeris, 2006).

Illeris’ theory constitutes a main reference for Danish teachers and in teachers’ education, therefore, the integration between the content and incentive dimensions to actively engage pupils in learning is a central concern for teachers, for instance through the playful use of digital platforms and media in the classroom (Marchetti, 2021).

The challenges of virtual learning spaces

According to Illeris, all learning is situated. This is in contrast with the belief that learning is a filler process conducted by the teacher, as Ananga and Biney (2017) state. Learning can take place in many situated settings and is by Illeris defined as learning spaces. In our study, we will specifically investigate how distant learning spaces can affect learning practices.

Since Illeris described virtual learning spaces in 2006 a lot has happened technologically, however, many of his arguments are still relevant to this day, especially his claim that virtual learning rooms only solve limited tasks, mainly allowing for impersonal one-way communication, as personal communication is inhibited by the computer mediation (Illeris, 2006).

Distant learning requires the participants to engage, this can be seen in blended learning, which works when the pupils are motivated but can fail if they are ambivalent and reluctant (Illeris, 2006). Therefore, it is important to work from a pedagogical and didactic perspective to understand how pupils react to and can learn in a virtual learning space.

Another important aspect is the development of the virtual learning space, which should not imitate traditional classrooms, but should be developed on its own terms (Neytzsky-Wulff, 2009). On this front, the teacher plays a significant role in providing a structure, content presentation, framing collaboration, and interaction, fostering feedback, motivation, and relationships (Looi et al., 2021). During face-to-face instruction in classrooms, the teacher plays a facilitator role and coordinates the learning environment (Looi et al., 2021). During distant learning, the teacher plays a supporting role as a ‘guide on the side’ (Ananga and Biney, 2017), acting as “designers and facilitators of learning” or coaches in their pupils' learning process (Looi et al., 2021).

As previously mentioned, learning has also a social dimension, which should be structured so as to allow the pupils to feel at ease (Neytzsky-Wulff, 2009). However, due to the lack of metacommunication and body language, as the teachers can only express themselves through face and voice, it can be challenging to foster a pleasant atmosphere in virtual learning spaces. As a result, pupils might feel less safe in virtual than in physical learning spaces, hence not daring to express themselves (Neytzsky-Wulff, 2009).

However, virtual learning spaces can be better suited to individualization of learning than the traditional physical classroom, supporting flexibility and independence from time and space (as in Marchetti, 2021). The flexibility of distant learning can enable pupils to become more responsible for their learning and must find “their way” through the learning material (Neytzsky-Wulff, 2009). Hence, virtual learning spaces have the potential to promote reflection, action, and responsibility in learners, but there is no guarantee that the learners will act as desired, and learning might not occur (Andersen, 2020). In this sense, a downside of virtual learning spaces is that they build more on individual incentives than situated facilitation, making it harder for the teacher to ensure that their pupils will reach their learning goals to an acceptable degree. This implication is of great significance for our study, as during lockdown Danish teachers were forced to rely only on virtual learning spaces while addressing young pupils, who need close support from the perspective of Illeris’ incentive dimension, without any specific training or back-up solutions.

Methodology

The empirical foundation for this article is a Danish netnographic case study, as we have collected data through virtual observations (Pink, 2013) of three online classrooms totaling 96 pupils and three teachers, and focus group interviews (Costello et al., 2017) with 20 pupils in five groups in two junior secondary schools, during the second major lockdown in Denmark (January 2021-May 2021).

In Denmark, the three final grades (seven, eight, and nine) are often referred to as “graduating pupils” [udskoling], who are being prepared for their higher education by receiving extended formative feedback and grades during the school year. Moreover, these pupils must pass a final graded exam, which will qualify them for higher education. Our empirical work focuses on these pupils, who provided a critical case study to understand the impact of the sudden shift to virtual learning spaces in Danish schools. Due to this unique situation, some school principals declared that distant learning has degraded the quality of teaching, so much that the upcoming exams should be canceled (Rysgaard, 2021), nevertheless, the exams took place as usual challenging both teachers and pupils.

To collect our empirical data, we used a visual ethnographic method (Pink, 2013), recording videos for both interviews and observations. The interviews are conducted over two rounds, in February 2021 and April 2021. Pupils and teachers were invited to participate in semi-structured online focus group interviews through video conference tools such as Google Meet or Microsoft Teams. We asked open and closed questions (Preece et al., 2002), based on a manuscript with 15 prepared questions, and from there we let the participants elaborate on their answers and develop the conversation (Pink, 2013).

Moreover, one of the authors observed distant learning activities focusing on the interaction between pupils and teachers, from February to April 2021. The observer took an outsider position, shadowing (Tulowitzki, 2019), and observed without interfering. We conducted a thematic analysis of the empirical data and identified a series of challenges, regarding feedback and evaluation methods during distant learning, such as an increasing focus on extended written assignments and tests for the pupils.

We followed ethical methodological recommendations when gathering video recordings, we informed teachers and pupils about our study, and we provided an informed consent form to the family of the pupils. Moreover, we assured to follow the guidelines of the ethical board of the university, regarding respect for the participants and GDPR rules. Following the mentioned guidelines, we avoided exposing any images of the participants in our study.

In general, we observed that the structure of distant learning is similar throughout all classes. Online platforms, either Google Meet or Microsoft Teams, were used as virtual classrooms, which are both conference tools with a range of similar features: video and audio on/off switch, raise hand, mute, and share screen functionalities. Also, every online class content was structured the same way: A short visual introduction on today’s tasks, followed by group or individual work conducted outside the common virtual classroom for a restricted amount of time, and then concluded by a short sum up or discussion at the end of the class. Every class ended with a written outcome or test, based on today’s tasks, and is handed in immediately after. In our analysis, three prominent aspects have emerged as critical in characterizing how Danish Compulsory education has adapted to lockdown policies: the first aspect is adaptation and relates to the fact that teachers have been through a learning process on their own tentatively developing strategies to manage their work, the second is the extension of written work becoming heavier and more dominant in teaching practice, and the third is related to the challenges posed by the adopted learning platforms.

Analysis

In this section, we present our findings about how feedback practice has been affected by the shift to distant learning. Our analysis builds on Illeris’ dimensions of content, incentive, and interaction (4.1), finally we will look at the role of the adopted platforms (4.2).

Distant learning: An amputated attempt at learning

According to our analysis, even though there has been a pedagogical restructuring toward distant learning, there has been no change, in relation to Illeris’ content dimension. Distant learning should still correspond to the national Common Goals for regular education (§ 11, Ministry of Children & Education, 2020b), which provide the teachers with a framework for the content dimension. We noticed that opposite to what recommended by Neytzsky-Wulff (2009), teachers trying to reproduce classroom interaction with the available digital platforms and adopted the same basic structure. Nonetheless, the teachers adopted different planning forms, in one class the teacher focused on the learning goals, reformulating the more abstract Common Goals into tangible and transferable learning goals, to support the pupils in gaining understanding and putting them into context. In the other two classes instead, the teachers focused their content dimension on the Ministry of Children and Education’s test guidelines, for written and oral presentations for graduating pupils. Both parties organized the content so that the pupils received a clear framework to support their learning, at both an abstract level (in the form of Common Goals and the test guidance) and a concrete level (rephrased and adapted learning goals).

During each lesson, the pupils receive and hand in a task, but do not receive any feedback nor grades. In this process, we identify a risk of mislearning (Illeris, 2006), because if the teacher does not provide feedback to the pupils regarding their intended learning goals, the pupils might store deficient or erroneous knowledge as correct. Moreover, we found that a summative evaluation is only made for larger and course-ending assignments, which are also graded. But by that time, the pupil might have handed in several daily answers, with undetected and repeated errors. Hence, feedback might reach the pupils too late for making a difference, to the stage that the pupil forgets or becomes indifferent to their evaluation of the task, and thus their learning.

From a teacher’s perspective, the main purpose of the written assignments is to make the pupils feel that their work has a purpose for their progress and should not be seen as an excuse to keep them occupied during the school day (see citation underneath). However, the teachers argued that with distant learning, written assignments are their only opportunities to evaluate the pupils’ process and skill level:

“[…] Remember that all these questions [from the assignment] might as well be exams questions. Elaborate on your answer […] It is your responsibility to keep the conversation going at the exam.” (Teacher, 9th grade)

On the other hand, the pupils do not feel that all these written assignments provide them a better understanding of their learning outcome or progress, as teachers do not have the time to grade or provide daily feedback. Hence, from the pupils’ perspective, the main purpose of these assignments is to show to their teachers that they participate:

“I sometimes feel that we only have to do these assignments, so the teachers have physical proof that we are doing something” (Pupil, 9th grade).

The overload of evaluation processes results in states of demotivation and leaves the pupils with a feeling that, they just do the work because they must:

“If it is not homework, I don’t see myself doing it at all. It needs to have a purpose. […] So if it does not have to be presented in class or handed in, I often downgrade the task, or do not do it at all” (Pupil, 9th grade).

According to our interviews, the pupils have trouble seeing the purpose of the day-to-day assignments, which makes the extended number of written assignments consequential for the pupils’ work ethic.

In general, and especially concerning the day-to-day tasks, the pupils perceive the evaluation from the teachers as “deficient feedback”. Some of the pupils are not even sure if the teachers screen the content of their work, which, according to a pupil in 9th grade, has inspired some of his classmates to hand in empty documents. However, when the teachers at special occasions give formative feedback, the pupils often do not find it useful.

“I feel the feedback is very concrete to the specific task I just did, so I don’t feel like I can transfer it into another task and use this feedback […] I want to know what I should do differently next time. I don’t find that clear enough” (Pupil 9th grade).

Pupils refer to the feedback as shallow phrases like: “great work”, “well done” etc., which do not provide the pupils with a basis for further improvement.

The second dimension of Illeris’ framework is incentive and is related to motivation to learn, which based on our interviews with the teachers, can be assumed to play a key role in the pupils’ cognitive development (Jansen and Kiefer, 2020). Pupils from the age of 13-17 can be described as impulse-driven and hormonal (Jansen and Kiefer, 2020), which makes it difficult for teachers to promote positive development at this time. The teachers emphasize that pupils are difficult, especially when it comes to holding plenary speeches, however, the closer the pupils get to graduating, the more motivated and active they become (Teacher, 9th grade). According to our interviews, the risk of failing should motivate the pupils to improve, as they must have a good summative evaluation, in the form of (good) grades, to be in the best position to access the next educational levels (Teacher, 9th grade). However, data collected through interviews with the pupils suggest that they see these frequent written assignments as insignificant and demotivating. Moreover, as previously mentioned, these tasks are not directly included in the pupils’ evaluation and grading, because most day-to-day tasks are not even screened by the teachers when handed in:

“I don’t think they have the time to look all those assignments through. I know some [of my classmates] have handed in blank documents” (Pupil 9th grade)

Therefore, the pupils end up underprioritizing their assignments, and not putting much effort into their completion. Simultaneously, they do not perceive the summative feedback they receive for their written assignments as relevant, because they see it as too shallow and does not sufficiently address their overall learning process:

“I just feel that [assignments] are something that must be completed. It's just something boring. I don't feel like I'm getting anything out of it anyway. For the exam, we get grades. When we make a presentation or hand-in, it's not that super important.” (Pupil 9th grade).

From this, it can be deduced that the pupils’ motivation is linked to what is at stake for them, especially in relation to grading, while handing in an extensive number of daily tasks without grades nor feedback is seen as demotivating:

“When she doesn’t give feedback, it feels like I don’t gain as much. I feel like I somehow haven’t accomplished what I should, because I feel unsure whether I did it right” (Pupil 8th grade).

As according to Illeris, grades and feedback are seen by the pupils as a reward, and thus their motivation to do the tasks. If they cannot see the purpose of the assignment, a defense mechanism would arise (Illeris, 2006), so that the pupils would either: underprioritize the task, rush through it, or do not do it at all. In other words, it is not the learning that lies in doing the task that matters to the pupil, but the feedback they get from the teacher in the form of a grade or a comment; however, this only happens at the end of a course.

The last dimension from Illeris’ framework is that of interaction, which is greatly challenged by distant learning.

The pupils are used to easily interacting with each other, while the teachers also have the opportunity to walk around the tables, informally observing the pupils’ work:

“ […] when you are in class, you will experience a kind of synergy between the pupils, and you will notice that many more participate” (Teacher, 9th grade)

In the classroom, the teachers can more easily assess the pupils’ academic level, in relation to their understanding of a given learning situation, their motivation to learn, and the interaction that occurs either formally, when the pupils raise their hand to call the teacher, or informally, when the teacher looks about the pupil’s shoulder and provides proactive feedback. In this sense, the physical classroom appears designed to support all the parameters that Illeris (2006) describes as essential for learning: Content, motivation, and interaction. Moreover, teaching practice has evolved through time in the classroom, to make good use of the available affordances. In a virtual space, on the other hand, Illeris’ interaction dimension appears as being amputated, especially in relation to teacher-pupil interaction. More specifically virtual learning spaces enable the pupils to hide from the teacher, as they can choose not to participate actively in learning activities without being caught, by either turning off the camera or simply not contributing orally when the teacher asks a question in plenary:

“I think it is easier because you are not obliged to answer [online]. You don't have that physical closeness with the pupils. In class, you can maintain eye contact, until they answer. But we can't have the same physical eye contact online. You can just turn off the camera, and then you are nonexistent. When I cannot have eye contact with the pupil, I cannot signal that I expect something from you right now.” (Teacher, 9th grade)

Discussions in plenaries are often conducted in physical classrooms but cannot be transferred 1:1 in the virtual room, because of the way the interaction dimension affects the interaction among teachers and pupils. Therefore, the teachers tried to restructure discussion-based teaching, so to replicate digitally what they would do physically with group work and supervision, framing group work within breakout rooms. However, this interaction is also challenging among pupils:

“[…] I fully understand this is more difficult to do online. But if we were in class, we could not just be quiet either. It would be nice that others, besides from [name] talked, and then me commenting on what [name] said.” (Pupil, 8th grade)

The lack of social interaction between teachers and pupils, and among pupils emerges as a critical challenge. Based on Illeris, learning cannot occur if all parameters are not met, hence we find particularly critical how distant learning is washing out the interaction dimension. Summarizing, we find that virtual learning spaces are challenging learning, by amputating the interaction dimension of learning, so that: pupils can easily hide from the teachers, the teachers lack insight into the pupils’ learning, and shift from plenary discussions to isolated group work in breakout rooms. At the same time, the teachers have shifted their role from a guiding to a controlling function (Looi et al., 2021), to ensure that all the pupils participate, since online they must rely on the pupils’ motivation:

“[…] I figured that sometimes you just have to say: Never mind. He did not get that right. We will have to see if he gets it at another point. I just have to be happy that some of the pupils got it.” (Teacher, 8th grade)

Summarizing, we find that the main challenge caused by during distant learning to feedback processes is that teachers do not feel close enough to the pupils and their learning processes, because of a lack of informal communication. Hence it is difficult for the teachers to get an overview of the pupils’ progress, hence the teachers must rely upon formal daily tasks to foster active engagement in the classroom. However, the assessment load is too large for the teachers to allow for systematic feedback, and can manage only one or two graded major written assignments per class.

Learning platforms and their challenges in distant learning and learning

According to our data, distant learning emerged as permeated by constant assessment of their pupils (see section 2.2). Digital platforms like Meebook and MinUddannelse offer tools like digital plans or portfolios, where both teachers and pupils can add relevant content that visualizes the pupil’s progress. But while conducting distant learning, the teachers found it difficult to evaluate the pupils in anything other than written assignments, therefore, these plans or portfolios were not used by either the teachers or the pupils, hence becoming irrelevant, even though these could provide an effective evaluation digital tool:

“I think it has become more difficult to follow my pupils' process. I have not been as close to them as I am used to. […] So I do not use the evaluation tasks the same way [during distant learning] as I am used to.” (Teacher 8th grade)

Moreover, according to our interviews, the pupils do not use these digital evaluation tools either, unless they are explicitly asked by the teachers:

“[…] they use it, if we ask them to, […] but it is never used further.” (Teacher 7th and 9th grade).

In Illeris’ terms, this aspect seems to address both dimensions of incentive and interaction, as the pupils do not find any value in this evaluation tools, perceiving it as an additional task, unless the teachers initiate an interaction through them, implicitly communicating their relevance. The motivation for using the evaluation tools is neglected both by teachers and pupils, probably because without an explicit incentive, is feels too abstract for the pupils to use them.

As reported during interviews, the pupils prefer a grade over feedback, we find that this happen as grades feel more concrete regarding the pupils’ achievement of learning goals, while feedback might feel more abstract, this issue is raised during distant learning because the pupils are left much more to themselves to reflect on their own learning.

In conclusion, our study suggests that the main issue emerging from the adoption of only distant learning for graduating pupils, is that these pupils are led toward final exams and further education, mostly based on written assignments and tests, amputating the close interaction teachers and pupils experience in the physical classroom. Moreover, this lack of close interaction even affected the use of the formative digital tools embodied in the learning platforms, which by design should have supported distant forms of assessment.

Discussion of the results: Adapting to a new (virtual) reality

Although specifically related to the circumstances created by the lockdowns experienced in Denmark, our data embody general implications regarding the adoption of distance learning and teaching practice for pupils at the end of primary school, who are too young to be in full control of their own learning (Jansen and Kiefer, 2020), but for whom good grades constitute a main priority to continue into high school, two conditions requiring constant contact between pupils and teachers.

Our observations reveal that the teachers have tried to restructure their pedagogical methods, to adapt to the exclusive use of digital learning platforms and distant learning practice to the needs of graduating pupils. However, both pupils and teachers stated that it did not quite work, especially with regards to formative assessment, we connect this challenge to lacks in Illeris’ interaction dimension at a critical stage for the pupils’ education. During our interviews, the teachers stated that lecture-based classes become tedious online, and the pupils lose their focus. The teachers also emphasize how pupils must be activated during classes, to partake in their learning process and connect themselves to the purpose and learning goals, a harder task online. And finally, the interviewed teachers stated that their regular evaluation methods were difficult to use during distant learning, which led them to increase their use of written tasks and tests instead. Moreover, the teachers also observed how their influence on the pupils’ learning processes was restricted since the pupils did the work away from the online classroom. This caused the teachers to feel alienated from the pupils’ learning process:

To compensate, the teachers attempted to regain agency by controlling when the pupils were doing the work, notably through the extended use of written assignments, hand-ins, presentations, follow-ups, and tests.

Hence, from a more general perspective, our findings suggest that distant learning seems to better support formal assessment than informal feedback practices, hence not properly supporting learning processes in young pupils who are not self-motivated enough on their own to be fully in charge of their learning. Our findings suggest that the physical distance created by distant learning disrupted teachers’ understanding of individual pupils’ learning processes, academic level, work ethic, and motivations, and thereby the teacher’s ability to convey qualified feedback to the pupil. For instance, teachers cannot get a sense of pupils’ processes by walking around the classroom and offering informal and spontaneous feedback, which is the result of alienating teachers and pupils from each other, making learning more authoritative and less collaborative. This implies that distant learning appeared to prioritize results rather than process, concomitantly, our findings indicate that pupils feel overwhelmed by the many written assignments and tests, which they perceive as “a waste”, when not accompanied by any formative feedback. The pupils stressed that the lack of feedback was disruptive to their motivation, creating a barrier against learning, and ultimately resulting in Half-hearted work, lack of insight into their own learning capabilities, and the desire to hide behind their screens, simply turning off the microphone and camera.

Another issue we have identified, is the expanded focus on independent work or group work, as the teachers tried to limit frontal teaching online and prevent the pupils from losing interest. This implies that most learning activities are conducted away from the teachers, enhancing the distance with the pupils, hence eliciting uncertainties in the teachers, such as: Will the pupils get their work done? Is the amount of work too much or too little? Have they understood the tasks?

This lack of overview on the pupils’ participation constitutes a main issue for the teachers, who by law should guide their pupils through learning, while during distant learning they can only hope for the pupils to achieve the intended learning outcomes. The teachers tried to compensate for this lack of interaction with the pupils, increasing the number of written assignments, which also constituted a big burden to the teachers, who could not manage to give feedback and grades for every written assignment, hence the teachers were only able to do summative evaluations on bigger assignments. For this reason, the pupils became more sensitive to the lack of formative feedback and defensive toward the given assignment, and toward learning (Illeris, 2006). Furthermore, frequent unevaluated tests increase the risk of misunderstanding the content, because of a lack of opportunities for correcting mistakes when relevant.

All considered we find that the transition to distant learning has given the pupils far more autonomy than earlier. The teacher’s role in the learning process is reduced to a ‘guide on the side’ (Ananga and Biney, 2017), where they previously took the role of a controller (Ananga and Biney, 2017) of the learning environment. This means that the pupils had to take more responsibility and reflect on their own learning to a greater extent, while the teachers were also learning how to help them do so. Moreover, graduating pupils represent a more sensitive group, as they are challenged by their coming exams and the choice of further education, at a time when teachers are not available as before. They need to perform at a defining end term, they are motivated by feedback as grades, as they know that these grades will go to the high school of their choice, which will give them further access to college, and university. The teachers argue that this focus on grades is a “shame”:

“It is such a shame that this has become the main focus. Because it is actually the feedback they can use. The grade just shows how you performed here and now in this specific assignment. The feedback will help you progress further […] But it is difficult to convince the pupils that the feedback is the most important when you know that it is the grades and not the feedback, they bring along they in the educational system” (Teacher, 8th grade)

Interestingly, physical interaction between pupils and teachers also contributes to a kind of obligation to answer. One teacher replies that when they are physically present, all she must do is ask a question and then keep eye contact with a pupil, and then the pupil would feel obliged to provide an answer. In distant learning, it is impossible to establish eye contact and the pupils can just “hide” behind the camera (just turn off the camera and microphone), leaving the teachers wondering if the pupils are present or not.

Taking these insights into account, we argue that due to the COVID-19 pandemic formative feedback processes changed from rapid, informal, and spontaneous feedback practices inside the physical classroom, facilitated by non-verbal interaction, into an overload of written assignments and tests, uploaded in a formal and structured system. Moreover, formative feedback practice ended up being neglected on a day-to-day basis, causing disengagement, potential misunderstandings, and a lack of insight into one’s own learning.

On a more general level, we can conclude that adapting forms of informal feedback to distant learning is a challenge, as support for occasional dialogues in the classroom is being replaced by written deliveries, which more naturally lead toward result-oriented, formal assessment.

Conclusion

Empirical data from our study highlight the challenges in keeping formative feedback and informal assessment methods during distant learning. This transition is primarily based on the difficulty in teacher-pupil relationship maintenance. Using Illeris’ learning triangle as a theoretical framework, we can conclude that especially the interaction dimension is highly challenging during distant learning. This is due to the lack of both formal and informal interaction, caused by an absence of non-verbal communication and physical proximity between pupil and teacher in the virtual room, which is commonplace in the physical room. This significant change also affects the other two dimensions: The pupils’ motivation is challenged because their only option to showcase their work and get their learning outcome evaluated is through written assignments and tests. This work form is overloading the teachers, and they cannot manage to go through each assignment and give feedback and grades.

Another issue is the perceived distance created by distant learning, which enables the pupils to hide from the teachers and disrupts the teacher’s overview of the learning process, academic level, work ethic, and motivation of individual pupils, and thereby the teacher’s ability to convey qualified feedback to the pupil.

The feedback process, and especially the formative feedback, which “Folkeskoleloven” requires, is challenged on more levels:

• Teachers can’t follow pupils’ processes virtually the same way as physically. That results in extending written assignments.

• The teachers do not have enough preparation time to go through and give meaningful formative feedback to the pupils.

• The pupils are overburdened with work, which in their opinion is “wasted” because they don’t get any formative feedback anyway.

• The lack of feedback is disruptive to pupil motivation, creates a barrier against learning, and ultimately results in half-hearted work and a lack of insight into one’s own learning capabilities.

The digital feedback practice has become very formal and structured, compared to the more informal and observation-based physical classroom approach, but it did not feel more rewarding. At the same time, teachers are forced to trust that their pupils will correctly internalize the received written feedback and convert it into meaningful learning stimuli on an independent basis.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Vickie Ravn Bechsgaard

Emanuela Marchetti

Notes

Author Biographies

Vickie Ravn Bechsgaard, MA in Media Studies at the University of Southern Denmark. Her research interests lie with the digital media practices of children and youth in an educational context, and her Master’s Thesis investigates the challenges of distant learning, in lieu of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Danish Compulsory Education with a focus on visualizing pupils’ individual learning outcome through a design approach. Her recent position is as an external teacher in marketing, communications and media production alongside being a self-employed communications consultant.

Emanuela Marchetti, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor in Media Studies at the University of Southern Denmark. She has a background in Interaction Design and her research interests are centered on the digitization of the public sector, more specifically education practices and healthcare. She is particularly interested in investigating the integration of digital technologies (games, simulations and robotics), to enrich existing practices in relation to shared sense making and sociomaterial from a playful perspective.

Thomas Enemark Lundtofte, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor in Media Studies at University of Southern Denmark and head of the department’s MA programme in Child and Youth Culture. His research interests lie with the digital media practices of children and youth, and his recent work contributes to understanding how digital media practices have unfolded in lieu of the COVID-19 pandemic. He serves in various boards and networks in relation to his research and as a consultant to the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre.

References

Ananga

Biney

(2017) Comparing face-to-face and online teaching and learning in higher education. MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends and Practices 7: 165–179. DOI: 10.52634/mier/2017/v7/i2/1415.

Andersen

(2020) Perspektiver På Begrebet Online Undervisning. I: it, Medier Og Læring 44: 4. Toftlund: Danmarks It- og Medievejledningsforening, pp. 6–11.

Andersen

Gerwien

Kammer

(2020) Sammen, hver for sig: universitetsstuderendes læringsstrategier under COVID19-nedlukningen. Læring og Medier 13(23): 1–18.

Berg

Kaas

Grumløse

(2020) Når skolens børn evaluerer sig selv. Studier I Læreruddannelse Og -Profession 5(2): 56–75.

Costello

McDermott

Wallace

(2017) Netnography: Range of practices, misperceptions, and missed opportunities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods.

Gynther

(2005) Blended learning: It og læring i et teoretisk og praktisk perspektiv. Unge Pædagoger.

Gynther

Karsten

Jørnø

Rasmus

(2019) Designviden og designeksperimenter som afsæt for implementering af læringsplatforme i Folkeskolen. Learning Tech – Tidsskrift for Læremidler, Didaktik og Teknologi (6): 56–81.

Hjelholt

Schou

(2017) Digital lifestyles between solidarity, discipline and neoliberalism: On the historical transformations of the Danish IT political field from 1994 to 2016. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 15(1).

Illeris

(2006) Læring. Roskilde: Roskilde Universitetsforlag.

10.

Jansen

Kiefer

(2020) Understanding brain development: investing in young adolescents’ cognitive and social-emotional development. Middle School Journal 51(4): 18–25.

11.

Jørnø

Gynther

(2018) Hvordan kan teknologi påvirke pædagogiske og didaktiske praksisser? – En analyse af en case vedrørende implementeringen af digitale læringsplatforme i Folkeskolen. København: Læring og Medier 11(18): 1–20.

12.

Looi

Chee-K

Chan

S-W

(2021) Crisis and opportunity: transforming teachers from curriculum deliverers to designers of learning. In Burgos

Tlili

Tabacco

. (edt) Radical Solutions for Education in a Crisis Context - COVID-19 as an Opportunity for Global Learning. NY: Springer, pp. 131–145.

13.

Marchetti

(2021) Are they playing? Analyzing “play” in playful learning in Occupational Therapy education. E-learning and Digital Media 18(3): 290–306. DOI: 10.1177/2042753020980114.

14.

Ministry of Children & Education (1993) Lov Om Folkeskolen § 13 Stk, 2. Ministry of Children & Education. Available at: https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/1993/509

15.

Ministry of Children & Education (2020a) Om Fælles Mål. Ministry of Children & Education. Available at: https://www.uvm.dk/folkeskolen/fag-timetal-og-overgange/faelles-maal/om-faelles-maal

16.

Ministry of Children & Education (2020b) § 11 I BEK Nr. 629 Af 15/05/2020 Bekendtgørelse Om Dagtilbud Og Nødundervisning m.V. På Børne- Og Undervisningsområdet Som Led I Forebyggelse Og Afhjælpning I Forbindelse Med Covid-19. Available at: https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2020/629

17.

Neytzsky-Wulff

(2009) Nærhed I Fjernundervisning – Om Brugen Af Audio & Video I Sprogundervisnin. Læring & Medier (LOM).

18.

Pink

(2013) Doing Visual Ethnography. 3rd edition. UK: Sage.

19.

Preece

Rogers

Sharp

(2002) Interaction Design: Beyond Human- Computer Interaction. NY: Wiley & Sons Inc.

20.

Rysgaard

Kåre

(2021) Corona Forringer Undervisningen: Skoleledere Vil Aflyse Eksaminer På Stribe. DR. Available at: https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/corona-forringer-undervisningen-skoleledere-vil-aflyse-eksaminer-paa-stribe

21.

The Danish Evaluation Institute (2016) Inspiration til it-didaktisk og innovativ undervisning - Erfaringer fra skoler, der har deltaget i demonstrationsskoleforsøgene. København: Danmarks Evalueringsinstitut.

22.

The Danish Evaluation Institute (2016a) Implementering Af Digitale Læringsplatforme. København: Danmarks Evalueringsinstitut.

23.

The Danish Evaluation Institute (2021) Grundskolers Erfaringer Med Nødundervisning Under COVID-19 Pandemien – en Undersøgelse af Nødundervisningen i Foråret og Sommeren 2020. København: Danmarks Evalueringsinstitut.

24.

The Danish Government, The Municipalities’ Main Organization and Danish Regions (2016): Et Stærkere Og Mere Trygt Digitalt Samfund - Den Fællesoffentlige Digitaliseringsstrategi 2016-2020. København: Digitaliseringsstyrelsen

25.

Tulowitzki

(2019) Shadowing school principals: what do we learn? Educational Management Administration & Leadership 47(1): 91–109.