Beyond the red pen: Screencast-mediated feedback in L2 writing

Year 2026, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 22 - 44, 31.01.2026

Merve Savaşçı , Gizem Akçor

https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.1836639

Abstract

Although research on screencast-mediated feedback has yielded promising findings, further empirical inquiry is required to deepen our understanding of its potential. Correspondingly, this exploratory study sought the perceived affordances and constraints of screencast-mediated feedback as compared to traditional text (or written) feedback. Drawing mainly upon Mayer's (2005) Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML) as the framework, university-level English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) students received screencast-mediated feedback over four writing tasks in an undergraduate course requiring them to write in academic English. In total, the duration of screencast videos ranged from 37 minutes to 100 minutes (M≈ 59 mins.), amounting to approximately 34 hours (2019 minutes) in total. Employing a mixed-method design, data were triangulated through surveys and open-ended questions. Findings revealed that most participants expressed positive attitudes toward screencast feedback, highlighting its ease of use, enhanced clarity, and usefulness for revising, organizing, and structuring their writing, as well as for strengthening arguments and elaboration. In terms of constraints, nearly two-thirds of participants reported no challenges, while others cited difficulties such as the inability to ask questions immediately, limited sense of interaction, and occasional technical issues. Overall, the study advances understanding of learner perceptions and offers implications for L2 writing feedback, particularly in relation to instructors’ digital literacy, pedagogical practices, and the practical integration of screencasting technologies in academic writing contexts.

Keywords

screencast , screencast-mediated feedback , technology-enhanced feedback , multimodal feedback , EFL writing

Ethical Statement

he study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki as it involved human participants. We made sure to protect participants’ rights and presented an informed consent form to approve before data collection.

Supporting Institution

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Thanks

We would like to thank the participants of this study.

References

• Ali, A. D. (2016). Effectiveness of using screencast feedback on EFL students' writing and perception. English Language Teaching, 9(8), 106-121. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n8p106
• Anson, C. M., Dannels, D. P., Laboy, J. I., & Carneiro, L. (2016). Students’ perceptions of oral screencast responses to their writing: Exploring digitally mediated identities. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 30(3), 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1050651916636424
• Bailey, R. (2009). Undergraduate students' perceptions of the role and utility of written assessment feedback. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 1, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.v0i1.29
• Bhattacharya, K. (2017). Fundamentals of qualitative research: A practical guide. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315231747
• Bjerknes, A. L., Opdal, L., & Canrinus, E. T. (2024). ‘I finally understand my mistakes’–the benefits of screencast feedback. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 33(1), 43-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2023.2258134
• Borup, J., West, R. E., & Thomas, R. (2015). The impact of text versus video communication on instructor feedback in blended courses. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63, 161–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9367-8
• Bush, J. C. (2020). Using screencasting to give feedback for academic writing. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2020.1840571
• Carabajal, K., LaPointe, D., & Gunawardena, C. N. (2003). Group development in online learning communities. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (2nd ed.) (pp. 217-234). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson.
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
• Cunningham, K. J. (2019). Student perceptions and use of technology-mediated text and screencast feedback in ESL writing. Computers and Composition, 52, 222-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2019.02.003
• Dawson, P., Henderson, M., Mahoney, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2018). What makes for effective feedback: Staff and student perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1467877
• Din Eak, A., & Annamalai, N. (2024). Enhancing online learning: A systematic literature review exploring the impact of screencast feedback on student learning outcomes. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 19(3), 247-263. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-08-2023-0100
• Ducate, L., & Arnold, N. (2012). Computer-mediated feedback: Effectiveness and student perceptions of screencasting software versus the comment function. In G. Kessler, E. Oskoz, & I. Elola (Eds.), Technology across writing contexts and tasks (pp. 31-56). CALICO Publications.
• Edwards, K., Dujardin, A. F., & Williams, N. (2012). Screencast feedback for essays on a distance learning MA in professional communication. Journal of Academic Writing, 2(1), 95-126. https://doi.org/10.18552/joaw.v2i1.62
• Elola, I., & Oskoz, A. (2016). Supporting second language writing using multimodal feedback. Foreign Language Annals, 49(1), 58-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12183
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2023). How to design and evaluate research in education (11th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Ghosn-Chelala, M., & Al-Chibani, W. (2018). Screencasting: Supportive feedback for EFL remedial writing students. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(3), 146-159. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-08-2017-0075
• Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 1-30.
• Harper, F., Green, H., & Fernandez-Toro, M. (2015). Using screencasts in the teaching of modern languages: Investigating the use of Jing® in feedback on written assignments. The Language Learning Journal, 46(3), 277-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2015.1061586
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
• Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2015). Video-based feedback on student assessment: Scarily personal. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 51-66. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1878
• Higgins, R., Hartley, P., & Skelton, A. (2001). Getting the message across: The problem of communicating assessment feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 269-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510120045230
• Higgins, R., Hartley, P., & Skelton, A. (2002). The conscientious consumer: Reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 53-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070120099368
• Hyland, F. (1998). The impact of teacher written feedback on individual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(3), 255-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(98)90017-0
• İnan-Karagül, B., & Şeker, M. (2021). Improving language learners’ use of self-regulated writing strategies through screencast feedback. SAGE Open, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211064895
• Jeon, H., & DeCapua, S. (2024). Transforming feedback practices through the use of screencast video feedback in L2 writing classrooms. Journal of Response to Writing, 10(1), 62–77. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/journalrw/vol10/iss1/3
• Kurt, G., & Karabulut, A. (2024). Screencast feedback in L2 writing: Student perceptions and uptake. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5011375
• Lamey, A. (2015). Video feedback in philosophy. Metaphilosophy, 46(4-5), 691-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/meta.12155
• Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford University Press.
• Mahoney, P., Macfarlane, S., & Ajjawi, R. (2019). A qualitative synthesis of video feedback in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(2), 157–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1471457
• Marriott, P., & Teoh, L. K. (2012). Using screencasts to enhance assessment feedback: Students’ perceptions and preferences. Accounting Education, 21(6), 583–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2012.725637
• Marsovna, B. L., Sergeevna, L. Y., & Vladimirovna, C. A. (2024). Screencasts for effective teacher feedback: A multimedia approach. Проблемы современного педагогического образования, (85-1), 62-65.
• Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48). Cambridge University Press.
• Moore, N. S., & Filling, M. L. (2012). iFeedback: Using video technology for improving student writing. Journal of College Literacy & Learning, 38, 3-14.
• Özkul, S., & Ortaçtepe, D. (2017). The use of video feedback in teaching process‐approach EFL writing. TESOL Journal, 8(4), 862-877. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.362
• Pachuashvili, N. (2021). Screencast video feedback and its implication on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 17(33), 66. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2021.v17n33p66
• Pachuashvili, N. (2024). Using screencast video feedback in the 21st century EFL writing class. IAFOR Journal of Education, 12(1), 225-242. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.12.1.09
• Penn, S., & Brown, N. (2022). Is screencast feedback better than text feedback for student learning in higher education? A systematic review. Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal, 15(2), 1-18. https://oro.open.ac.uk/82935/15/Simon%20Penn_Accepted%20Manuscript.pdf
• Sadler, R. D. (2010). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 535-550. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903541015
• Saldaña, J. (2011). Fundamentals of qualitative research. Oxford University Press.
• Savaşçı, M., & Akçor, G. (2023). Multimodal technology-mediated feedback in second language writing classes through screencasting. In G. Yangın-Ekşi, S. Akayoğlu, & L. Anyango (Eds.), New directions in technology for writing instruction (pp. 107-122). Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13540-8_6
• Séror, J. (2013). Show me! Enhanced feedback through screencasting technology. TESL Canada Journal, 30(1), 104. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v30i1.1128
• Tao, S., & Qin, W. (2025). “Feedback is communication between human beings”: Understanding adolescents' conception of written qualitative feedback. Frontiers in Language Sciences, 4, 1453230. https://doi.org/10.3389/flang.2025.1453230
• Tavakoli, H. (2012). A dictionary of language acquisition: A comprehensive overview of key terms in first and second language acquisition. Rahnama Press.
• Thaiss, C. J., & Zawacki, T. M. (2006). Engaged writers and dynamic disciplines: Research on the academic writing life. Boynton/Cook.
• Thompson, R., & Lee, M. J. (2012). Talking with students through screencasting: Experimentations with video feedback to improve student learning. The Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, 1(1), 1-16. https://jitp.commons.gc.cuny.edu/talking-with-students-through-screencasting-experimentations-with-video-feedback-to-improve-student-learning/
• Vatansever, A., & Toker, T. (2022). E-Written versus screencast feedback in the L2 writing classroom: An engagement perspective. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.52380/mojet.2022.10.3.371
• Vincelette, E. J., & Bostic, T. (2013). Show and tell: Student and instructor perceptions of screencast assessment. Assessing Writing, 18(4), 257-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2013.08.001
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
• Weaver, M. R. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors' written responses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(3), 379-394. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500353061
• Wood, J. (2023). Enabling feedback seeking, agency and uptake through dialogic screencast feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(4), 464–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2089973
• Yiğit, M. F., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2021). Effect of video feedback on students’ feedback use in the online learning environment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 60(1), 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2021.1966489