Adaptive formative feedback to improve strategic search decisions in task-oriented reading

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 233-251

  Llorens, A C ^a   Cerdan R ^a   Vidal Abarca, E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VALENCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Comprehension; Computer based feedback; Formative feedback; Specific feedback information; Strategic search decisions; Task oriented reading

Indexed keywords

EID: 84900447694     PISSN: 02664909     EISSN: 13652729     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jcal.12050     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Ávila, V., Vidal-Abarca, E., Gil, L., & Llorens, A. C. (2010). Effect of feedback on different levels of task-oriented reading skills. Paper presented at 1st Joint Conference of the EPS and SEPEX, Granada, Spain.
2. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213-238.
3. Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
4. Butler, A. C., Godbole, N., & Marsh, E. J. (2013). Explanation feedback is better than correct answer feedback for promoting transfer of learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 290-298.
5. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of educational research, 65(3), 245-281.
6. Cataldo, M. G., & Oakhill, J. (2000). Why are poor comprehenders inefficient searchers? An investigation into the effects of text representation and spatial memory on the ability to locate information in text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 791-799.
7. Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2011). Selecting information to answer questions: Strategic individual differences when searching texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(2), 201-205.
8. Cerdán, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 209-222.
9. Dunlosky, J., & Lipko, A. (2007). Metacomprehension: A brief history and how to improve its accuracy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 228-232.
10. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355.
11. Graesser, A. C., D'Mello, S., & Cade, W. (2011). Instruction based on tutoring. In R. E. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 408-426). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
12. Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101(3), 371.
13. Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249-271). New York: Taylor & Francis.
14. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.
15. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Llorens, A. C., Gil, L., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Mañá, A., & Gilabert, R. (2011). The reading literacy test for secondary education (CompLEC). Psicothema, 23(4), 808-817.
17. Llorens, A. C., Vidal-Abarca, E., Cerdán, R., & Ávila, V. (submitted) Does formative feedback on search behavior help readers in reading literacy situations? (Unpublished)
18. Maki, R. H. (1998). Test predictions over text material. In D. J. Hacker, A. C. Graesser, & J. Dunlosky (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 117-144). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Mañá, A. (2011). Individual differences in monitoring accuracy and self-regulation in task-oriented reading (European PhD). University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
20. Maña, A., Vidal-Abarca, E., Domínguez, C., Gil, L., & Cerdán, R. (2009). Papel de los procesos metacognitivos en una tarea de pregunta-respuesta con textos escritos. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 32(4), 553-565.
21. Mason, B. J., & Bruning, R. (2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: What the research tells us (Center for Instructional Innovation, University of Nebraska-Lincoln: 14). Retrieved from http://dwb.unl.edu/Edit/MB/MasonBruning.html. Accessed January 2008.
22. McCrudden, M. T., Magliano, J., & Schraw, G. (2010). Exploring how relevance instructions affect personal reading intentions, reading goals, and text processing: A mixed methods study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(4), 229-241.
23. McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 113-139.
24. McNamara, D. S., & Magliano, J. (2009). Toward a comprehensive model of comprehension. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 51, 297-384.
25. Metacalfe, J., & Finn, B. (2008). Evidence that judgements of learning are causally related to study choice. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(1), 174-179.
26. 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.
27. Narciss, S. (2004). The impact of informative tutoring feedback and self-efficacy on motivation and achievement in concept learning. Experimental Psychology, 51(3), 214-228.
28. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do - student performance in reading, mathematics and science (volume I). doi:10.1787/9789264091450-en
29. Pashler, H., Cepeda, N. J., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2005). When does feedback facilitate learning of words? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 3-8.
30. Perfetto, G. A., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1983). Constraints on access in a problem solving context. Memory and Cognition, 11, 24-31.
31. Phye, G. D., & Sanders, C. E. (1994). Advice and feedback: Elements of practice for problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 286-301.
32. Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2007). Improving students' self-evaluation of learning for key concepts in textbook materials. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(4-5), 559-579.
33. Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Rouet, J., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2002). 'Mining for meaning': Cognitive effects of inserted questions in learning from scientific text. In J. Otero, J. León, & A. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 417-436). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 49-69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Serrano, M., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Ferrer, A. (submitted). Reading strategic decisions and performance in PISA-like reading literacy tasks. (Unpublished)
37. Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189.
38. Snow, C., & RAND Reading Study Group (2002). Reading for understanding. RAND. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/
39. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning from texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 66-73.
40. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Redford, J. (2009). Metacognitive monitoring during and after reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 85-106). New York, NY: Routledge.
41. van den Broek, P., Young, M., Yuhtsuen, T., & Linderholm, T. (1999). The landscape model of reading: Inferences and the online construction of memory representation. In H. van Oostendorp & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), The construction of mental representations during reading (pp. 71-98). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
42. Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., Ferrer, A., Ávila, V., Martínez, T., Mañá, A., Llorens, A.C., Gil, L., Cerdán, R., Ramos, L., & Serrano, M. A. (In press). TuinLEC, un tutor inteligente para mejorar la competencia lectora [TuinLEC, an intelligent tutoring system to improve reading literacy skills]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 37(1).
43. Vidal-Abarca, E., Mañá, A., & Gil, L. (2010). Individual differences for self-regulating task-oriented reading activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 817-826.
44. Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Salmerón, L., Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., Gil, L., Ferris, R. (2011). Recording on-line processes in task-oriented reading with Read&Answer. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 179-192.
45. Vidal-Abarca, E., Salmerón, L., & Mañá, A. (2011). Individual differences in task-oriented reading. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Relevance instructions and goal-focusing in text learning (pp. 267-294). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
46. Whyte, M. M., Karolick, D. M., Neilsen, M. C., Elder, G. D., & Hawley, W. T. (1995). Cognitive styles and feedback in computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12, 195-203.