Counterintuitive effects of online feedback in middle school math: results from a randomized controlled trial in ASSISTments

Educational Media International

Volumn 54, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 231-244

  McGuire, Patrick ^a   Tu, Shihfen ^b   Logue, Mary Ellin ^b   Mason, Craig A ^b   Ostrow, Korinn ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

^c WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

differential effects of online feedback; intelligent tutoring systems; Middle school mathematics; randomized controlled trial

Indexed keywords

EID: 85031428343     PISSN: 09523987     EISSN: 14695790     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09523987.2017.1384161     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Baek, J. M., Wickstrom, M. H., Tobias, J. M., Miller, A. L., Safak, E., Wessman-Enzinger, N., & Kirwan, J. V., (2017). Preservice teachers’ pictorial strategies for a multistep multiplicative fraction problem. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 45, 1–14.10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.10.005
2. Ball, D. L., (1990). Prospective elementary and secondary teachers’ understanding of division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 132–144.10.2307/749140
3. Baroody, A., (1987). Children’s mathematical thinking. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
4. Booth, J. L., & Koedinger, K. R., (2012). Are diagrams always helpful tools? Developmental and individual differences in the effect of presentation format on student problem solving. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 492–511.10.1111/bjep.2012.82.issue-3
5. Borko, H., Eisenhart, M., Brown, C. A., Underhill, R. G., Jones, D., & Agard, P. C., (1992). Learning to teach hard mathematics: Do novice teachers and their instructors give up too easily? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 194–222.10.2307/749118
6. Butler, F. M., Miller, S. P., Crehan, K., Babbit, B., & Pierce, T., (2003). Fraction instruction for students with mathematics disabilities: Comparing two teaching sequences. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18(2), 99–111.10.1111/ldrp.2003.18.issue-2
7. Cheung, A. C. K., & Slaven, R. E., (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 88–113.10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.001
8. Cole, R. S., & Todd, J. B., (2003). Effects of web-based multimedia homework with immediate rich feedback on student learning in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(11), 1338–1343.10.1021/ed080p1338
9. Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSS-M). (2010). National governors association center for best practices & council of chief state school officers. Washington, DC: Authors.
10. Fendel, D. M., (1987). Understanding the structure of elementary mathematics. Newton, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
11. Flores, M. M., (2010). Using the concrete-representational-abstract sequence to teach subtraction with regrouping to students at risk for failure. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 195–207.10.1177/0741932508327467
12. Fyfe, E. R., DeCaro, M. S., & Rittle-Johnson, B., (2015). When feedback is cognitively-demanding: The importance of working memory capacity. Instructional Science, 43(1), 73–91.10.1007/s11251-014-9323-8
13. Hattie, J., & Gan, M., (2011). Instruction based on feedback. In R., Mayer & P., Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249–271). New York, NY: Routledge.
14. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H., (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.10.3102/003465430298487
15. Institute of Education Sciences. (2009). IES practice guide–assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for Elementary and Middle Schools. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/rti_math_pg_042109.pdf
16. Jansen, B. R. J., Louwerse, J., Straatemeier, M., Van der Ven, S. H. G., Klinkenberg, S., & Van der Maas, H. L. J., (2013). The influence of experiencing success in math on math anxiety, perceived math competence, and math performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 24, 190–197. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.12.014
17. Jordan, L., Miller, M. D., & Mercer, C. D., (1999). The effects of concrete to semi-concrete to abstract instruction in the acquisition and retention of fraction concepts and skills. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9, 115–122.
18. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J., (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 23–31.10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4
19. Kelly, K., Heffernan, N., Heffernan, C., Goldman, S., Pellegrino, G., & Soffer, D., (2013). Estimating the Effect of Web-Based Homework. In H., Lane, K., Yacef, J., Motow, & P., Pavlik (Eds.), The artificial intelligence in education conference (pp. 824–827). Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-3-642-39112-5
20. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A., (1996). Effects of feedback intervention on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
21. Koedinger, K. R., Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J., (2008). Trade-offs between grounded and abstract representations: Evidence from algebra problem solving. Cognitive Science, 32(2), 366–397.10.1080/03640210701863933
22. Larken, J. H., & Simon, H. A., (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.10.1111/j.1551-6708.1987.tb00863.x
23. Li, Y., (2008). What do students need to learn about division of fractions? Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 13, 546–552.
24. Mendicino, M., Razzaq, L., & Heffernan, N. T., (2009). A comparison of traditional homework to computer-supported homework. Journal for Research on Technology Education, 41(3), 331–359.10.1080/15391523.2009.10782534
25. Mercer, C. D., Jordan, L., & Miller, S. P., (1996). Constructivistic math instruction for diverse learners. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 11, 147–156.
26. Murphy, R., Gallagher, L., Krumm, A., Mislevy, J., & Hafter, A., (2014). Research on the use of khan academy in schools. Menlo Park, CA: SRI Education.
27. National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the national mathematics advisory panel. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
28. Nguyen, D. M., Hsieh, Y. J., & Allen, G. D., (2006). The impact of web-based assessment and practice on students’ mathematics learning attitudes. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25(3), 251–279.
29. Nguyen, D. M., & Kulm, G., (2005). Using web-based practice to enhance mathematics learning and achievement. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 3(3), 1–16.
30. Osana, H. P., & Royea, D. A., (2011). Obstacles and challenges in preservice teachers’ explorations with fractions: A view from a small-scale intervention study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 30(4), 333–352.10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.07.001
31. Pass, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J., (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4.10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1
32. Peterson, S. K., Mercer, C. D., & O’Shea, L., (1988). Teaching learning disabled students place value using the concrete to abstract sequence. Learning Disabilities Research, 4, 52–56.
33. Razzaq, L., Patvarczki, J., Almeida, S. F., Vartak, M., Feng, M., Heffernan, N. T., & Koedinger, K. R., (2009). The ASSISTment builder: Supporting the Life cycle of tutoring system content creation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 2(2), 157–166.10.1109/TLT.2009.23
34. Schaffert, S., & Hilzensauer, W., (2008). On the way towards personal learning environments: Seven crucial aspects. eLearning Papers (9), 1–10.
35. Shute, V. J., (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189.10.3102/0034654307313795
36. Sousa, D. A., (2008). How the brain learns mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
37. Stampfer, E., & Koedinger, K. R., (2013). When seeing isn’t believing: Influences of prior conceptions and misconceptions. In M., Knauff, N., Sebanz, M., Pauen, & I., Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1384–1389). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
38. Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Cooper, H., (2013). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on K-12. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 970–987.10.1037/a0032447
39. Swan, K., (2003). Learning effectiveness: What the research tells us. In J., Bourne & J. C., Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education, practice and direction (pp. 13–45). Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
40. Sweller, J., (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312.10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
41. Tirosh, D., (2000). Enhancing prospective teachers’ knowledge of children’s conceptions: The case of division of fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(1), 5–25.10.2307/749817
42. Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M., (2009). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
43. Van Merriënboer, J. J., & Sweller, J., (2010). Cognitive load theory in health professional education: Design principles and strategies. Medical Education, 44(1), 85–93.10.1111/med.2009.44.issue-1
44. Witzel, B., Mercer, C. D., & Miller, D. M., (2003). Teaching algebra to students with learning difficulties: An investigation of an explicit instruction model. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18(2), 121–131.10.1111/ldrp.2003.18.issue-2