Abstract

Previous studies compare quantitative feedback ratings of student peers and instructors, but new presentation-feedback technologies enable qualitative-feedback comparison. This study extends previous research by comparing qualitative feedback and business professionals’ feedback. Compared to the professionals, the instructors provided similar feedback types and sentiment; students, however, de-emphasized message delivery and made fewer suggestions for improvement. The results suggest that students may need additional practice in critiquing message delivery and in suggesting needed improvements in their peers’ oral presentations. The study also provides a methodology using the new technologies for instructors to calibrate their own and their students’ feedback with professionals’ feedback.

Journal
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
Published
2023-03-01
DOI
10.1177/23294906221120015
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  2. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly

References (52) · 12 in this index

  1. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing
  2. Writing & speaking for business
  3. 10.1177/1080569904672009
  4. Content analysis of communications
  5. 10.1177/108056990106400303
Show all 52 →
  1. 10.1080/13691060802151945
  2. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  3. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  4. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  5. 10.1177/001316446002000104.
  6. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.983
  7. 10.1177/1469787412441284
  8. NACTA Journal
  9. 10.1177/108056999806100306
  10. 10.1080/0260293950200305
  11. GoReact (n.d.). Feedback. https://help.goreact.com/hc/en-us/articles/360003066092
  12. 10.1177/1080569909356350.
  13. 10.1080/09639284.2011.560763
  14. 10.3102/003465430298487
  15. 10.1177/1049732305276687
  16. 10.1177/1080569913493460
  17. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching
  18. 10.1177/0021943612474990
  19. 10.1177/1080569904268084
  20. 10.2307/2529310
  21. 10.22682/bcrp.2020.3.1.53
  22. 10.19030/ctms.v3i4.5583
  23. 10.1080/15358593.2016.1187454
  24. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  25. 10.3905/jpe.2003.320037
  26. 10.1080/0260293032000066218
  27. 10.1023/b:truc.0000021811.66966.1d
  28. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  29. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  30. 10.31274/etd-180810-5203
  31. 10.4135/9781071802878
  32. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  33. 10.1080/02602938.2013.860077
  34. PitchVantage (n.d.). Universities. https://pitchvantage.com/how-it-works-universities/
  35. 10.20429/ijsotl.2011.050106
  36. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  37. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  38. 10.1177/1080569909349524
  39. Written Communication
  40. Journal of the Academy of Business Education
  41. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  42. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  43. The Journal of the Legal Writing Institute
  44. 10.1177/002194368802500204
  45. 10.1080/03075079.2015.1117064
  46. The human use of human beings: Cybernetics and society
  47. Quantitative research methods for communication: A hands-on approach