Does Computer-based Elaborated Feedback Influence the Students’ Question-Answering Process?

  1. Ignacio Máñez Sáez 1
  2. Eduardo Vidal-Abarca 1
  3. Tomás Martínez 1
  1. 1 Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology, ERI-Lectura, University of Valencia, Valencia
Revista:
Electronic journal of research in educational psychology

ISSN: 1696-2095

Año de publicación: 2019

Volumen: 17

Número: 47

Páginas: 81-106

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.25115/EJREP.V17I47.2156 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Electronic journal of research in educational psychology

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

Introduction. Students usually answer comprehension questions from texts as part of their academic activities. Feedback has been found to be relatively effective to improve comprehension and learning from texts. However, there is little research on how computer-based feedback influences the question-answering process. This study examines the effects of elaborated feedback (EF) on the students’ question-answering performance and their accuracy to assess textual relevance. Further, the study explores whether EF influences the question, the text-search, and the feedback processing. Method. Seventy-five 7th and 8th grade students answered a set of questions having the text available. During the question-answering process, students were forced to highlight the text information they considered relevant to answer each question. While half of the students received EF on their question-answering performance and their accuracy to assess textual relevance, the other half had access to the same screens without formative feedback (i.e., control feedback group). Results. EF enhanced the students’ question-answering performance and reduced the amount of non-relevant text information students assessed as question-relevant. However, EF did not affect the question-relevant text information highlighted. Although EF did not influence the question and the text-search processing times in comparison to the control feedback group, students who received EF devoted more time and accessed additional information more often than the control group. Discussion and conclusion. Computer-based EF on the students’ question-answering performance and their accuracy to assess textual relevance can be efficient to improve the students’ question-answering process. This study sheds light on how to deliver EF in a digital environment. However, further research is necessary to explore the cognitive and metacognitive processes involved in feedback processing.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Anmarkrud, Ø., McCrudden, M. T., Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2013). Task-oriented reading of multiple documents: Online comprehension processes and offline products. Instructional Science, 41(5), 873-894. doi:10.1007/s11251-013-9263-8
  • 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
  • Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. V. (2007). Reading comprehension difficulties: correlates, causes, and consequences. In K. Cain, & J. Oakhill (Eds.), Children's comprehension problems in oral and written language: A cognitive perspective (pp. 41-75). New York, NY: Guilford.
  • Cain, K., Oakhill, J. V., Barnes, M. A., & Bryant, P. E. (2001). Comprehension skill, inference-making ability, and their relation to knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 29(6), 850-859. doi:10.3758/BF03196414
  • 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, 791-799.
  • Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2011) Selecting information to answer questions: Strategic individual differences when searching texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 201–205. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.007
  • Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martinez, T., Gilabert, R., & Gil, L. (2009). Impact of question-answering tasks on search processes and reading comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 19(1), 13-27. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.12.003
  • Coté, N., Goldman, S. R., & Saul, E. U. (1998). Students making sense of informational text: relations between processing and representation. Discourse Processes, 25(1), 1-53. doi:10.1080/01638539809545019
  • Gil, L., Martínez, T., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2015). Online assessment of strategic reading literacy skills. Computers & Education, 82, 50-59. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.026
  • Golke, S., Dörfler, T., & Artelt, C. (2015). The impact of elaborated feedback on text comprehension within a computer-based assessment. Learning and Instruction, 39, 123-136. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.05.009
  • Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & Louwerse, M. M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text? In A. P. Sweet, & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 82-98) New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487
  • Kaakinen, J. K., & Hyönä̈, J. (2011). Online processing of and memory for perspective relevant and irrelevant text information. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 223–242). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  • 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(2), 254-284. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
  • Lee, H. W., Lim, K. Y., & Grabowski, B. L. (2009). Generative learning strategies and metacognitive feedback to facilitate comprehension of complex science topics and self-regulation. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 18(1), 5-25.
  • Llorens, A. C., Gil, L., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Mañá, A., & Gilabert, R., (2011) Evaluación de la competencia lectora: la prueba de Competencia Lectora para Educación Secundaria (CompLEC). Psicothema, 23(4), 808-817.
  • Llorens, A. C., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Cerdán, R. (2016). Formative feedback to transfer self-regulation of task-oriented reading strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(4), 314-331. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12134
  • Llorens, A. C., Vidal-Abarca, E., Cerdán, R., & Ávila, V. (2015). Does formative feedback on search behavior help students in answering comprehension questions from an available text? Infancia y Aprendizaje, 38(4), 808-841. doi:10.1080/02103702.2015.1076269
  • Martínez, T., Vidal-Abarca, E., Gil, L., & Gilabert, R. (2009). On-line assessment of comprehension processes. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12, 308-319. doi:10.1017/S1138741600001700
  • Martínez, T., Vidal-Abarca, E., Sellés, P., & Gilabert, R. (2008). Evaluation of comprehension strategies and processes: Test of Comprehension Processes (TCP). Infancia y Aprendizaje, 31(3), 319-332.
  • Mason, B., & Bruning, R. (2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: What the research tells us. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247291218_Providing_Feedback_in_Computer-based_Instruction_What_the_Research_Tells_Us
  • McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 113-139. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9010-7
  • Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms: Teacher use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25, 98–117. doi:10.1080/02568543.2010.531076
  • Oakhill, J. V., Hartt, J., & Samols, D. (2005). Levels of comprehension monitoring and working memory in good and poor comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 18(7-9), 657-686. doi:10.1007/s11145-005-3355-z
  • OECD (2006). Assessing Scientific, Reading and Mathematical Literacy: A Framework for PISA 2006. París: OECD.
  • OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science. OECD Publishing.
  • Ramos, L., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2013). Differences between students with high and low reading literacy skills: A study with think aloud methodology. Cultura y Educación, 25(3), 295-308. doi:10.1174/113564013807749722
  • Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. doi:10.3102/0034654307313795
  • Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2011). Attention paid to feedback provided by a computer-based assessment for learning on information literacy. Computers & Education, 56, 923–930. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.007
  • Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2015). Effects of feedback in a computer-based learning environment on students’ learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 85(4), 475-511. doi:10.3102/0034654314564881
  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., & Abad, N. (2002). A proposal for good expository text: Toward an expository text technology. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 25(4), 499-514. doi:10.1174/021037002762064064
  • 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. doi:10.1037/a0020062
  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, T., Salmerón, L., Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., Gil, L., Mañá, A., Llorens, A., & Ferris, R. (2011). Recording on-line processes in task-oriented reading with Read&Answer. Behavior Research Methods, 43(1), 179–192. doi:10.3758/s13428-010-0032-1
  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Reyes, H., Gilabert, R., Calpe, J., Soria, E., & Graesser, A. C. (2002). ETAT: Expository Text Analysis Tool. Behavior Research Methods, 34(1), 93-107.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet