The impact of elaborated feedback on text comprehension within a computer-based assessment

Learning and Instruction

Volumn 39, Issue , 2015, Pages 123-136

  Golke, Stefanie ^a   Dörfler, Tobias ^b   Artelt, Cordula ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BAMBERG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Elaborated feedback; Feedback presentation type; Inferences; Motivation; Text comprehension

Indexed keywords

EID: 84934935524     PISSN: 09594752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.05.009     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Aleven V., Stahl E., Schworm S., Fischer F., Wallace R. Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Review of Educational Research 2003, 73(3):277-320. 10.3102/00346543073003277.
2. Allington R.L., McGill-Franzen A. Comprehension difficulties among struggling readers. Handbook of research on reading comprehension 2009, 551-568. Routledge, New York, NY. S.E. Israel, G.G. Duffy (Eds.).
3. Auer M., Gruber G., Mayringer H., Wimmer H. Salzburger Lese-Screening für die Klassenstufen 5-8 (SLS 5-8) 2005, Hogrefe, Göttingen.
4. Bangert-Drowns R.L., Kulik C.-L.C., Kulik J.A., Morgan M.T. The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research 1991, 61(2):213-238. 10.3102/00346543061002213.
5. Berthold K., Nückles M., Renkl A. Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction 2007, 17(5):564-577. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.007.
6. van den Boom G., Paas F., van Merrienboer J.J.G. Effects of elicited reflections combined with tutor or peer feedback on self-regulated learning and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction 2007, 17(5):532-548. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.003.
7. Bowyer-Crane C., Snowling M.J. Assessing children's inference generation: what do tests of reading comprehension measure?. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2005, 75(2):189-201. 10.1348/000709904X22674.
8. Butler D.L., Winne P.H. Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research 1995, 65(3):245-281. 10.3102/00346543065003245.
9. Cain K., Oakhill J.V. Inference making ability and its relation to comprehension failure in young children. Reading and Writing 1999, 11(5-6):489-503. 10.1023/A:1008084120205.
10. Cain K., Oakhill J.V. Reading comprehension difficulties: correlates, causes, and consequences. Children's comprehension problems in oral and written language: A cognitive perspective 2007, 41-75. Guilford, New York, NY. K. Cain, J. Oakhill (Eds.).
11. Cain K., Oakhill J.V., Barnes M.A., Bryant P.E. Comprehension skill, inference-making ability, and their relation to knowledge. Memory & Cognition 2001, 29(6):850-859. 10.3758/BF03196414.
12. Clinton V. Examining associations between Reading motivation and inference generation beyond Reading comprehension skill. Reading Psychology 2015, 1-26. 10.1080/02702711.2014.892040.
13. Comer C.L. Benefits of the task for the delivery of negative feedback 2007, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.
14. Coté N., Goldman S.R., Saul E.U. Students making sense of informational text: relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes 1998, 25(1):1-53. 10.1080/01638539809545019.
15. Denton C.A., Enos M., York M.J., Francis D.J., Barnes M.A., Kulesz P.A., et al. Text-processing differences in adolescent adequate and poor comprehenders reading accessible and challenging narrative and informational text. Reading Research Quarterly 2015, 10.1002/rrq.105.
16. Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS 2009, Sage Publications, London, UK.
17. Gernsbacher M.A., Faust M.E. The mechanism of suppression: a component of general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1991, 17(2):245-262. 10.1037/0278-7393.17.2.245.
18. Gernsbacher M.A., Varner K.R., Faust M.E. Investigating differences in general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1990, 16(3):430-445. 10.1037/0278-7393.16.3.430.
19. Glogger I., Holzäpfel L., Schwonke R., Nückles M., Renkl A. Activation of learning strategies in writing learning journals: the specifity of prompts matters. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 2009, 23(2):95-104. 10.1024/1010-0652.23.2.95.
20. Goldhammer F., Naumann J., Stelter A., Tóth K., Rölke H., Klieme E. The time on task effect in reading and problem solving is moderated by task difficulty and skill: Insights from a computer-based large-scale assessment. Journal of Educational Psychology 2014, 106(3):608-626. 10.1037/a0034716.
21. Graesser A.C., McNamara D.S., Louwerse M.M. What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text?. Rethinking reading comprehension 2003, 82-98. Guilford Publications, New York, NY. A.P. Sweet, C.E. Snow (Eds.).
22. Graesser A.C., Millis K.K., Zwaan R.A. Discourse comprehension. Annual Review of Psychology 1997, 48:163-189. 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.163.
23. Graesser A.C., Singer M., Trabasso T. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review 1994, 101(3):371-395. 10.1037//0033-295X.101.3.371.
24. Guerin B. Mere presence effects in humans: a review. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1986, 22(1):38-77. 10.1016/0022-1031(86)90040-5.
25. Guthrie J.T., Wigfield A., Barbosa P., Perencevich K.C., Taboada A., Davis M.H., et al. Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology 2004, 96(3):403-423. 10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.403.
26. Hattie J., Timperley H. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 2007, 77(1):81-112. 10.3102/003465430298487.
27. Havnes A., Smith K., Dysthe O., Ludvigsen K. Formative assessment and feedback: making learning visible. Studies in Educational Evaluation 2012, 38(1):21-27. 10.1016/j.stueduc.2012.04.001.
28. Heller K.A., Perleth C. Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4. bis 12 2000, Klassen, Revision (KFT 4-12+R) [Cognitive assessment test], Beltz, Göttingen.
29. Kintsch W. Comprehension. A paradigm for cognition 1998, University Press, Cambridge.
30. Kluger A.N., Adler S. Person- versus computer-mediated feedback. Computers in Human Behavior 1993, 9(1):1-16. 10.1016/0747-5632(93)90017-M.
31. Kluger A.N., DeNisi A. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin 1996, 119(2):254-284. 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254.
32. Kulhavy R.W., Stock W.A. Feedback in written instruction: the place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review 1989, 1(4):279-308. 10.1007/BF01320096.
33. Kulik J.A., Kulik C.-L.C. Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research 1988, 58(1):79-97. 10.3102/00346543058001079.
34. Kunter M., Schümer G., Artelt C., Baumert J., Klieme E., Neubrand M., et al. PISA 2000: Dokumentation der Erhebungsinstrumente 2002, Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung, Berlin.
35. Kupiainen S., Vainikainen M.-P., Marjanen J., Hautamäki J. The role of time on task in computer-based low-stakes assessment of cross-curricular skills. Journal of Educational Psychology 2014, 106(3):627-638. 10.1037/a0035507.
36. Lee H.W., Lim K.Y., Grabowski B.L. Generative learning strategies and metacognitive feedback to facilitate comprehension of complex science topics and self-regulation. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 2009, 18(1):5-25.
37. Long D.L., Oppy B.J., Seely M.R. Individual differences in readers' sentence- and text-level representations. Journal of Memory and Language 1997, 36(1):129-145. 10.1006/jmla.1996.2485.
38. McElvany N., Kortenbruck M., Becker M. Lesekompetenz und Lesemotivation. Entwicklung und Mediation des Zusammenhangs durch Leseverhalten. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 2008, 22(3-4):207-219. 10.1024/1010-0652.22.34.207.
39. Morrison G.R., Ross S.M., Gopalakrishnan M., Casey J. The effects of feedback and incentives on achievement in computer-based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology 1995, 20(1):32-50. 10.1006/ceps.1995.1002.
40. Mory E.H. Feedback research revisited. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology 2004, 745-783. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. 2nd ed. D.H. Jonassen (Ed.).
41. Nation K. Children's reading comprehension difficulties. The science of reading: A handbook 2005, 248-265. Blackwell, Malden, MA. M.J. Snowling, C. Hulme (Eds.).
42. Oakhill J.V., Hartt J., Samols D. Levels of comprehension monitoring and working memory in good and poor comprehenders. Reading and Writing 2005, 18(7-9):657-686. 10.1007/s11145-005-3355-z.
43. Oakhill J.V., Yuill N. Higher order factors in comprehension disability: processes and remediation. Reading comprehension difficulties 1996, 69-92. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. C. Cornoldi, J. Oakhill (Eds.).
44. Otero J. Influence of knowledge activation and context on comprehension monitoring of science texts. Metagcognition in educational theory and practice 1998, 145-164. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah. D.J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, A.C. Graesser (Eds.).
45. Perfetti C.A., Marron M.A., Foltz P.W. Sources of comprehension failure: theoretical perspectives and case studies. Reading comprehension difficulties 1996, 137-165. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. C. Cornoldi, J. Oakhill (Eds.).
46. Peverly S.T., Wood R. The effects of adjunct questions and feedback on improving the reading comprehension skills of learning-disabled adolescents. Contemporary Educational Psychology 2001, 26(1):25-43. 10.1006/ceps.1999.1025.
47. Schunk D.H., Rice J.M. Extended attributional feedback: Sequence effects during remedial reading instruction. Journal of Early Adolescence 1986, 6(1):55-66. 10.1177/0272431686061005.
48. Schunk D.H., Rice J.M. Learning goals and progress feedback during reading comprehension instruction. Journal of Reading Behavior 1991, 23(3):351-364.
49. Schunk D.H., Rice J.M. Strategy fading and progress feedback: effects on self-efficacy and comprehension among students receiving remedial reading services. Journal of Special Education 1993, 27(3):257-276. 10.1177/002246699302700301.
50. Shute V.J. Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research 2008, 78(1):153-189. 10.3102/0034654307313795.
51. Singer M., Harkness D., Stewart S.T. Constructing inferences in expository text comprehension. Discourse Processes 1997, 24(2-3):199-228. 10.1080/01638539709545013.
52. Sternberg R.J., Grigorenko E.L. Dynamic testing 2002, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
53. Thillmann H., Künsting J., Wirth J., Leutner D. Is it merely a question of "What" to prompt or also "When" to prompt?: The role of point of presentation time of prompts in self-regulated learning. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 2009, 23(2):105-115. 10.1024/1010-0652.23.2.105.
54. Van der Kleij F.M., Feskens R.C., Eggen T.J. Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students' learning outcomes a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 2015, Advance online publication. 10.3102/0034654314564881.
55. Winne P.H., Graham L., Prock L. Amodel of poor readers' text based inferencing: effects of explanatory feedback. Reading Research Quarterly 1993, 28(1):53-66.
56. Wirth J. Promoting self-regulated learning through prompts. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 2009, 23(2):91-94. 10.1024/1010-0652.23.2.91.
57. Zwaan R.A., Radvansky G.A. Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin 1998, 123(2):162-185. 10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162.