Effects of feedback elaboration and feedback timing during computer-based practice in mathematics problem solving

Computers and Education

Volumn 110, Issue , 2017, Pages 154-169

  Attali, Yigal ^a   van der Kleij, Fabienne ^b  

^a EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

^b AUSTRALIAN CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Computer based testing; Feedback; Learning; Mathematics practice; Transfer

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER TESTING; FEEDBACK; PROBLEM SOLVING; TIMING CIRCUITS;

COMPUTER-BASED TESTING; DELAYED FEEDBACK; EXPERIMENTAL TESTING; FEEDBACK TIMING; IMMEDIATE FEEDBACKS; LEARNING; MULTIPLE CHOICE; TRANSFER;

COMPUTER AIDED ANALYSIS;

EID: 85016788721     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.012     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Attali, Y., Effects of multiple-try feedback and question type during mathematics problem solving on performance in similar problems. Computers & Education 86 (2015), 260–267, 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.011.
2. Attali, Y., Laitusis, C., Stone, E., Differences in reaction to immediate feedback and opportunity to revise answers for multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 2016, 10.1177/0013164415612548 Advance online publication.
3. Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulik, C.C., Kulik, J.A., Morgan, M.T., The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research 61 (1991), 213–238, 10.3102/00346543061002213.
4. Bassok, M., Holyoak, K.J., Interdomain transfer between isomorphic topics in algebra and physics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 15 (1989), 153–166, 10.1037/0278-7393.15.1.153.
5. Bennett, R.E., The changing nature of educational assessment. Review of Research in Education 39 (2015), 370–407, 10.3102/0091732X14554179.
6. Butler, A.C., Karpicke, J.D., Roediger, H.L., The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 13 (2007), 273–281, 10.1037/1076-898X.13.4.273.
7. Butler, A.C., Roediger, H.L., Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing. Memory & Cognition 36 (2008), 604–616, 10.3758/MC.36.3.604.
8. Butler, D.L., Winne, P.H., Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research 65 (1995), 245–281, 10.3102/00346543065003245.
9. Clariana, R.B., Lee, D., The effects of recognition and recall study tasks with feedback in a computer-based vocabulary lesson. Educational Technology Research and Development 49 (2001), 23–36, 10.1007/BF02504913.
10. Dempster, F.N., Spacing effects and their implications for theory and practice. Educational Psychology Review 1 (1989), 309–330, 10.1007/BF01320097.
11. Epstein, J.I., The effects of different types of feedback on learning verbal reasoning in computer-based instruction. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 9727464), 1997.
12. Gagné, R.M., The conditions of learning. 4th ed., 1985, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York.
13. Glaser, R., Instructional technology and the measurement of learning outcomes: Some questions. American Psychologist 18 (1963), 519–521, 10.1037/10254-024.
14. Gordijn, J., Nijhof, W.J., Effects of complex feedback on computer-assisted modular instruction. Computers and Education 39 (2002), 183–200, 10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00025-8.
15. Hattie, J., Biggs, J., Purdie, N., Effects of learning skills interventions on student learning: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 66 (1996), 99–136, 10.3102/00346543066002099.
16. Hattie, J., Timperley, H., The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research 77 (2007), 81–112, 10.3102/003465430298487.
17. Holyoak, K.J., Analogy. Holyoak, K.J., Morrison, R.G., (eds.) The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning, 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 117–142.
18. Jaehnig, W., Miller, M.L., Feedback types in programmed instruction: A systematic review. Psychological Record 57 (2007), 219–232.
19. Kalyuga, S., Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychology Review 19 (2007), 509–539, 10.1007/510648-007-9054-3.
20. Kalyuga, S., Knowledge elaboration: A cognitive load perspective. Learning and Instruction 19 (2009), 402–410, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.003.
21. Katz, I.R., Bennett, R.E., Berger, A.E., Effects of response format on difficulty of SAT-Mathematics items: It's not the strategy. Journal of Educational Measurement 37 (2000), 39–57.
22. 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 119 (1996), 254–284, 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254.
23. Kulhavy, R.W., Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research 47 (1977), 211–232, 10.3102/00346543047002211.
24. Kulhavy, R.W., Anderson, R.C., Delay-retention effect with multiple-choice tests. Journal of Educational Psychology 63 (1972), 505–512, 10.1037/h0033243.
25. Kulik, J.A., Kulik, C.-L.C., Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research 58 (1988), 79–97, 10.3102/00346543058001079.
26. Lee, H.W., Lim, K.Y., Grabowski, B.L., Improving self-regulation, learning strategy use, and achievement with metacognitive feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development 58 (2010), 629–648, 10.1007/s11423-010-9153-6.
27. Martinez, M.E., Cognition and the question of test item format. Educational Psychologist 34 (1999), 207–218, 10.1207/s15326985ep3404_2.
28. Mathan, S.A., Koedinger, K.R., An empirical assessment of comprehension fostering features in an intelligent tutoring system. Cerri, S.A., Gouarderes, G., Paraguacu, F., (eds.) Intelligent tutoring systems, 6th international conference, ITS 2002, Vol. 2363, 2002, Springer, New York, NY, 330–343.
29. Mory, E.H., Feedback research revisited. Jonassen, D., (eds.) Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2004, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 745–783.
30. Murphy, P., Reading comprehension exercises online: The effects of feedback, proficiency and interaction. Language Learning & Technology 11:3 (2007), 107–129.
31. Narciss, S., Huth, K., Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related tutoring feedback in a computer-based training for written subtraction. Learning and Instruction 16 (2006), 310–322, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.07.003.
32. Narciss, S., Sosnovsky, S., Schnaubert, L., Andrès, E., Eichelmann, A., Goguadze, G., et al. Exploring feedback and student characteristics relevant for personalizing feedback strategies. Computers & Education 71 (2014), 56–76, 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.011.
33. Pashler, H., Rohrer, D., Cepeda, N.J., Carpenter, S.K., Enhancing learning and retarding forgetting: Choices and consequences. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14 (2007), 187–193, 10.3758/BF03194050.
34. Perrenoud, P., From formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning processes. Towards a wider conceptual field. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 5 (1998), 85–102, 10.1080/0969595980050105.
35. Phye, G.D., Andre, T., Delayed retention effect: Attention, perseveration, or both?. Contemporary Educational Psychology 14 (1989), 173–185, 10.1016/0361-476X(89)90035-0.
36. Popham, J.W., Indices of adequacy for criterion-reference test items. Popham, J.W., (eds.) Criterion-referenced measurement: An introduction, 1971, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 79–98.
37. Renkl, A., Toward an instructionally oriented theory of example-based learning. Cognitive Science 38 (2014), 1–37, 10.1111/cogs.12086.
38. Renkl, A., Atkinson, R.K., Structuring the transition from example study to problem solving in cognitive skill acquisition: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychologist 38 (2003), 15–22, 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_3.
39. Schroth, M.L., The effects of delay of feedback on a delayed concept formation transfer task. Contemporary Educational Psychology 17 (1992), 78–82, 10.1016/0361-476X(92)90048-4.
40. Shute, V.J., Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research 78 (2008), 153–189, 10.3102/0034654307313795.
41. Smith, T.A., Kimball, D.R., Learning from feedback: Spacing and the delay–retention effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 36 (2010), 80–95, 10.1037/a0017407.
42. Smith, P.L., Ragan, T.J., Instructional design. 3rd ed., 2005, Wiley, New York, NY.
43. Sweller, J., Cooper, G.A., The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction 2 (1985), 59–89, 10.1207/s1532690xci0201_3.
44. Timmers, C., Veldkamp, B., Attention paid to feedback provided by a computer-based assessment for learning on information literacy. Computers and Education 56 (2011), 923–930, 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.007.
45. Van der Kleij, F.M., Eggen, T.J.H.M., Timmers, C.F., Veldkamp, B.P., Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers and Education 58 (2012), 263–272, 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.020.
46. Van der Kleij, F.M., Feskens, R.C.W., Eggen, T.J.H.M., Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 85 (2015), 475–511, 10.3102/0034654314564881.
47. Van der Kleij, F.M., Timmers, C.F., Eggen, T.J.H.M., The effectiveness of methods for providing written feedback through a computer-based assessment for learning: A systematic review. CADMO 19 (2011), 21–38, 10.3280/CAD2011-001004.