The effects of feedback on achievement, interest and self-evaluation: The role of feedback's perceived usefulness

Educational Psychology

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 269-290

  Harks, Birgit ^a   Rakoczy, Katrin ^a   Hattie, John ^b   Besser, Michael ^c,d   Klieme, Eckhard ^a  

^a GERMAN INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF KASSEL   (Germany)

^d LEUPHANA UNIVERSITY OF LÜNEBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

feedback; interest; mathematics achievement; perceived usefulness; self evaluation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897059515     PISSN: 01443410     EISSN: 14695820     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01443410.2013.785384     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213-238. doi: 10.3102/00346543061002213.
2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.
3. Barry, V. J. (2008). Using descriptive feedback in a sixth grade mathematics classroom. Retrieved from University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Center for Science, Mathematics & Computer Education website: http://www.digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=mathmidactionresearch
4. Blum, W., Drüke-Noe, C., Hartung, R., & Köller, O. (2006). Bildungsstandards Mathematik: konkret. Sekundarstufe I: Aufgabenbeispiele, Unterrichtsanregungen, Fortbildungsideen [National standards mathematics. Secondary Education I: Item examples, suggestions for instruction, ideas for trainings]. Berlin: Cornelsen-Scriptor.
5. Brett, J., & Atwater, L. (2001). 360° feedback: Accuracy, reactions and perception of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 930-942. doi: 10.1037//0021-9010.86.5.930.
6. 2CA)]. Frankfurt am Main: DIPF.
7. Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). Correcting a metacognitive error: Feedback increases retention of low confidence correct responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 918-928. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.4.918.
8. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245-281. doi: 10.3102/00346543065003245.
9. Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 474-482. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.79.4.474.
10. Cimpian, A., Arce, H. M. C., Markman, E. M., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Subtle linguistic cues affect children's motivation. Psychological Science, 18, 314-316. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01896.x.
11. Cizek, G. J., Rachor, R. E., & Fitzgerald, S. M. (1996). Teachers' assessment practices: Preparation, isolation, and the kitchen sink. Educational Assessment, 3, 159-179. doi: 10.1207/s15326977ea0302_3.
12. Corpus, J. H., & Lepper, M. R. (2007). The effects of person versus performance praise on children's motivation: Gender and age as moderating factors. Educational Psychology, 27, 487-508. doi: 10.1080/01443410601159852.
13. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
14. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation: Vol. 38. Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237-288). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
15. Dresel, M., & Haugwitz, M. (2008). A computer-based approach to fostering motivation and self-regulated learning. The Journal of Experimental Education, 77, 3-18. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.77.1.3-20.
16. Dresel, M., & Ziegler, A. (2007, September). Zur Abhängigkeit handlungsadaptiver Reaktionen nach Misserfolg von Attributionsstil, Fähigkeitsselbstkonzept, Impliziter Fähigkeitstheorie, Zielorientierungen und Interesse [Dependence of action adaptive reactions after failure from attributional style, self-concept, implicit theory of ability, goal orientation, and interest]. Paper presented at the 11th Conference of the German Psychological Society, Section of Educational Psychology, Berlin.
17. Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2000). Updating knowledge about encoding strategies: A componential analysis of learning about strategy effectiveness from task experience. Psychology and Aging, 15, 462-474. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.15.3.462.
18. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
19. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487.
20. Henderlong, J., & Lepper, M. R. (2002). The effects of praise on children's intrinsic motivation: A review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 774-795. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.774.
21. Higgins, R., Hartley, P., & Skelton, A. (2002). The conscientious consumer: Recognising the role of feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 53-64. doi: 10.1080/03075070120099368.
22. Hoska, D. M. (1993). Motivating learners through CBI feedback: Developing a positive learner perspective. In J. V. Dempsey, & G. C. Sales (Eds.), Interactive instruction and feedback (pp. 105-131). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
23. Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979). Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 349-371. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.64.4.349.
24. Jerram, H., Glynn, T., & Tuck, B. (1988). Responding to the message: Providing a social context for children learning to write. Educational Psychology, 8, 31-40. doi: 10.1080/0144341880080104.
25. Kamins, M. L., & Dweck, C. S. (1999). Person versus process praise and criticism: Implications for contingent self-worth and coping. Developmental Psychology, 35, 835-847. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.35.3.835.
26. Kanouse, D. E., Gumpert, P., & Canavan-Gumpert, D. (1981). The semantics of praise. In J. H. Harvey, W. Ickes, & R. F. Kidd (Eds.), New directions in attribution research (Vol. 3, pp. 97-115). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A., Harks, B., Blum, W., Leiss, D., & Rakoczy, K. (2010). Leistungsbeurteilung und Kompetenzmodellierung im Mathematikunterricht [Performance assessment and competence modelling in mathematics instruction]. [Special Issue on 'Kompetenzmodellierung']. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 56, 64-74. Retrieved from http://www.beltz.de/de/nc/paedagogik/zeitschriften/zeitschrift-fuer-paedagogik.html
28. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
29. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance. A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254.
30. Krampen, G. (1987). Differential effects of teacher comments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 137-146. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.79.2.137.
31. Krapp, A. (2005). Basic needs and the development of interest and intrinsic motivational orientations. Learning and Instruction, 15, 381-395. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.07.007.
32. Krause, U.-M., Stark, R., & Mandl, H. (2009). The effects of cooperative learning and feedback on e-learning in statistics. Learning and Instruction, 19, 158-170. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.03.003.
33. Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 279-308. doi: 10.1007/BF01320096.
34. Kulhavy, R. W., White, M. T., Topp, B. W., Chan, A. L., & Adams, J. (1985). Feedback complexity and corrective efficiency. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 285-291. doi: 10.1016/0361-476X(85)90025-6.
35. Labuhn, A. S., Zimmerman, B. J., & Hasselhorn, M. (2010). Enhancing students' self-regulation and mathematics performance: The influence of feedback and self-evaluative standards. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 173-194. doi: 10.1007/s11409-010-9056-2.
36. Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2009). The effects of differential feedback on students' examination performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15, 319-333. doi: 10.1037/a0017841.
37. Lucangeli, D., Tressoldi, P. E., & Cendron, M. (1998). Cognitive and metacognitive abilities involved in the solution of mathematical word problems: validation of a comprehensive model. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 257-275. doi:10.1006/ceps.1997.0962.
38. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York, NY: Erlbaum.
39. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104. doi: 10.1037//1082-989X.7.1.83.
40. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & William, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99-128. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4.
41. Mason, B. J., & Bruning, R. (2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: What the research tells us. Retrieved from http://www.dwb.unl.edu/Edit/MB/MasonBruning.html
42. McColskey, W., & Leary, M. R. (1985). Differential effects of norm-referenced and self-referenced feedback on performance expectancies, attribution, and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 275-284. doi: 10.1016/0361-476X(85)90024-4.
43. Mischo, C., & Rheinberg, F. (1995). Erziehungsziele von Lehrern und individuelle Bezugsnormen der Leistungsbewertung [Educational goals of teachers and individual frames of reference for performance assessment]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 9, 139-151.
44. Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback research review. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 745-783). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
45. Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children's motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 33-52. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.33.
46. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2007). Mplus (Version 5.0) [Computer software]. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
47. Narciss, S. (2006). Informatives tutorielles Feedback [Informative tutoring feedback]. Münster: Waxmann.
48. Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related tutoring feedback in a computer-based training for written subtraction. Learning and Instruction, 16, 310-322. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.07.003.
49. Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L., & Osborne, J. W. (2006). The effect of distributed monitoring exercises and feedback on performance, monitoring accuracy, and self-efficacy. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 159-179. doi:10.1007/s10409-006-9595-6.
50. Peterson, E. R., & Irving, S. E. (2008). Secondary school students' conceptions of assessment and feedback. Learning and Instruction, 18, 238-250. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.05.001.
51. Pieschl, S. (2009). Metacognitive calibration - an extended conceptualization and potential applications. Metacognition and Learning, 4, 3-31. doi: 10.1007/s11409-008-9030-4.
52. Pridemore, D. R., & Klein, J. D. (1995). Control of practice and level of feedback in computer-based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 444-450. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1995.1030.
53. Pulford, B. D., & Colman, A. M. (1997). Overconfidence: Feedback and item difficulty effects. Personal and Individual Differences, 23, 125-133. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00028-7.
54. Rakoczy, K., Buff, A., & Lipowsky, F. (2005). Befragungsinstrumente [Questionnaires]. In E. Klieme, C. Pauli, & K. Reusser (Eds.), Dokumentation der Erhebungs- und Auswertungsinstrumente zur schweizerisch-deutschen Videostudie 'Unterrichtsqualität, Lernverhalten und mathematisches Verständnis'. Materialien zur Bildungsforschung [Documentation of the instruments of the Swiss-German video study 'Instructional quality, learning patterns, and mathematical understanding.' Materials on educational research] (Vol. 13). Frankfurt am Main: GFPF.
55. Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., Klieme, E., & Blum, W. (in press). Written feedback in mathematics: Mediated by students' perception, moderated by goal orientation. Learning and Instruction.
56. Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A., & Harks, B. (2008). The interplay between student evaluation and instruction. Grading and feedback in mathematics classrooms. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 216, 110-123. doi: 10.1027/0044-3409.216.2.111.
57. Rheinberg, F. (2006). Bezugsnorm-Orientierung [Reference orientation]. In D. H. Rost (Ed.), Handwörterbuch Pädagogische Psychologie [Handbook of educational psychology] (3rd ed.). (pp. 55-62). Weinheim: Beltz.
58. Rheinberg, F., Vollmeyer, R., & Burns, B. D. (2001). FAM: Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung aktueller Motivation in Lern- und Leistungssituationen [FAM: A questionnaire for the assessment of current motivation in learning and achievement situations]. Diagnostica, 47, 57-66. doi: 10.1026//0012-1924.47.2.57.
59. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.
60. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 119-144. doi: 10.1007/BF00117714.
61. Sansone, C. (1989). Competence feedback, task feedback, and intrinsic interest: An examination of process and context. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 343-361. doi: 10.1016/0022-1031(89)90027-9.
62. Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147-177. doi: 10.1037//1082-989X.7.2.147.
63. Schiefele, U. (1998). Interest and learning - What we know and what we don't know. In L. Hoffmann, A. Krapp, K. A. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning: Proceedings of the Seeon Conference on interest and gender (pp. 91-105). Kiel: IPN.
64. Shih, S., & Alexander, J. (2000). Interacting effects of goal setting and self- or other-referenced feedback on children's development of self-efficacy and cognitive skill within the Taiwanese classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 536-544. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.92.3.536.
65. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.422.
66. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78, 153-189. doi: 10.3102/0034654307313795.
67. Stone, N. J. (2000). Exploring the relationship between calibration and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 437-475. doi: 10.1023/A:1009084430926.
68. Straub, R. (1997). Students' reactions to teacher comments: An exploratory study. Research in the Teaching of English, 31(1), 91-119. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/journals/rte
69. Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender's competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20, 291-303. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008.
70. Thompson, D. B. J. (2007). Effects of evaluative feedback on math self-efficacy, grade self-efficacy, and math achievement of ninth grade algebra students: A longitudinal approach (Doctoral dissertation). University of Louisville. Retrieved from http://www.gradworks.umi.com/32/68/3268832.html
71. Vallerand, R. J., & Reid, G. (1984). On the causal effects of perceived competence on intrinsic motivation: A test of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Sport Psychology, 6, 94-102.
72. Van der Kleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2012). Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58, 263-272. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.020.
73. Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2002). Exploring students' calibration of self-reports about study tactics and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 551-572. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00006-1.
74. Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., & Wilson, M. R. (1998). ACER ConQuest [Computer software]. Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research.
75. Zimmerman, B. (2000). Attaining self-regulation. A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeider (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.