  We ran a study on engagement and achievement for a first year undergraduate
programming module which used an online learning environment containing tasks
which generate automated feedback. Students could also access human feedback
from traditional labs. We gathered quantitative data on engagement and
achievement which allowed us to split the cohort into 6 groups. We then ran
interviews with students after the end of the module to produce qualitative
data on perceptions of what feedback is, how useful it is, the uses made of it,
and how it bears on engagement. A general finding was that human and automated
feedback are different but complementary. However there are different feedback
needs by group. Our findings imply: (1) that a blended human-automated feedback
approach improves engagement; and (2) that this approach needs to be
differentiated according to type of student. We give implications for the
design of feedback for programming modules.
