Question-answering skills: The role of feedback in digital environments

  1. Ignacio Máñez Sáez
  2. Eduardo Vidal-Abarca Gámez
Revue:
Enfance
  1. Benoit Schneider (coord.)

ISSN: 0013-7545,  1969-6981

Année de publication: 2020

Número: 3

Pages: 313-335

Type: Article

DOI: 10.3917/ENF2.203.0313 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

D'autres publications dans: Enfance

Objectifs de Développement Durable

Résumé

Les enseignants proposent habituellement des activités de compréhension de texte à leurs élèves et leur fournissent, à des fins d’apprentissage, une rétroaction visant l’exactitude de leurs réponses. Dans les classes traditionnelles, les enseignants n’ont que peu d’opportunité pour fournir une rétroaction individuelle adaptée. Les environnements numériques surmontent ces limites. Les systèmes informatisés donnent aux chercheurs et aux praticiens l’occasion de retracer les actions de l’élève qui exécute les tâches et de transformer immédiatement les données en messages de rétroaction personnalisés. La rétroaction élaborée (RE) s’est avérée plus efficace que la simple rétroaction corrective, telle la rétroaction sur la connaissance de la réponse (CR, par ex. Correct/Incorrect) ou la rétroaction sur la connaissance de la réponse correcte (CRC, par ex. La bonne réponse est X). RE peut inclure des informations supplémentaires, telles que des indices de suivi, des commentaires sur la précision de l’élève pour évaluer la pertinence du texte, ou des invites d’inférence. Lorsqu’ils répondent à des questions, les élèves doivent faire preuve à la fois de compréhension et d’aptitudes particulières à la lecture (par ex. rechercher dans le texte de l’information pertinente). Cet article examine des recherches récentes qui enregistrent des mesures en ligne sur la façon dont les étudiants effectuent des tâches de questions-réponses et réagissent à différentes formes de RE sur leur processus de questions-réponses. Les résultats obtenus suggèrent que la RE assistée par ordinateur peut améliorer à la fois les résultats de compréhension et les stratégies de traitement de texte, bien que les élèves accordent souvent plus d’attention à la partie corrective des messages de feedback qu’aux informations complémentaires de la RE ; ils s’engagent par ailleurs rarement dans un traitement approfondi du feedback. Les contributions théoriques et pratiques présentées sont discutées.

Références bibliographiques

  • (2009). PISA 2009 Assessment Framework,
  • 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(2), 213-238. doi:10.3102/00346543061002213
  • Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823
  • Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2007). Reading comprehension difficulties: Correlates, causes, and consequences. Children's Comprehension Problems in Oral and Written Language: A Cognitive Perspective, , 41-75.
  • 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. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.007
  • Cerdán, R., Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, 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
  • Corbalan, G., Kester, L., & J.G. van Merriënboer, J. (2009). Dynamic task selection: Effects of feedback and learner control on efficiency and motivation. Learning and Instruction, 19(6), 455-465. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.07.002
  • Dempsey, J. V., Litchfield, B. C., & Driscoll, M. P. (1993). Feedback, retention, discrimination error, and feedback study time. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(3), 303-326. doi:10.1080/08886504.1993.10782053
  • Farr, R., Pritchard, R., & Smitten, B. (1990). A description of what happens when an examinee takes a Multiple‐Choice reading comprehension test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27(3), 209-226. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1990.tb00744.x
  • Ferrer, A., Vidal-Abarca, E., Serrano, M. -., & Gilabert, R. (2017). Impact of text availability and question format on reading comprehension processes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 51, 404-415. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.10.002
  • Gil, L., Martinez, T., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2015). Online assessment of strategic reading literacy skills. Computers and 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
  • Gordijn, J., & Nijhof, W. J. (2002). Effects of complex feedback on computer-assisted modular instruction. Computers and Education, 39(2), 183-200. doi:10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00025-8
  • Graesser, A. C., D'Mello, S. K., & Cade, W. (2011). Instruction based on tutoring. Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction, , 408-426.
  • Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36(2), 193-202. doi:10.3758/BF03195564
  • Hattie, J., & Gan, M. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction, , 249-271.
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487
  • Healy, A. F., Schneider, V. I., & Bourne, L. E., Jr. (2012). Empirically valid principles of training. Training cognition: Optimizing efficiency, durability, and generalizability (pp. 13-39) doi:10.4324/9780203816783
  • Jaehnig, W., & Miller, M. L. (2007). Feedback types in programmed instruction: A systematic review. Psychological Record, 57(2), 219-232. doi:10.1007/BF03395573
  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition,
  • 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
  • Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 279-308. doi:10.1007/BF01320096
  • Llorens, A. C., Cerdán, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2014). Adaptive formative feedback to improve strategic search decisions in task-oriented reading. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(3), 233-251. doi:10.1111/jcal.12050
  • 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. -., Vidal-Abarca, E., Cerdán, R., & Ávila, V. (2015). Does formative feedback on search behaviour help students in answering comprehension questions from an available text? / ¿Ayuda la retroalimentación formativa sobre el comportamiento de búsqueda a contestar preguntas de comprensión en lecturas con texto disponible? Infancia y Aprendizaje, 38(4), 808-841. doi:10.1080/02103702.2015.1076269
  • Maier, U., Wolf, N., & Randler, C. (2016). Effects of a computer-assisted formative assessment intervention based on multiple-tier diagnostic items and different feedback types. Computers and Education, 95, 85-98. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.12.002
  • Máñez, I. (2019). Processing and Effectiveness of Formative Feedback to Increase Comprehension and Learning of Conceptual Knowledge in Digital Environments (Thèse Non Publiée),
  • Máñez, I. (2020). Does corrective feedback influence the use of elaborated feedback in a digital environment? [¿Influye la Retroalimentación Correctiva en el Uso de la Retroalimentación Elaborada en un Entorno Digital?] Psicologia Educativa, 26(1), 57-65. doi:10.5093/PSED2019A14
  • Máñez, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., Kendeou, P., & Martínez, T. (2019). How do students process complex formative feedback in question-answering tasks? A think-aloud study. Metacognition and Learning, 14(1), 65-87. doi:10.1007/s11409-019-09192-w
  • Máñez, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Martínez, T. (2019). Does computer-based elaborated feedback influence the students' question-answering process? Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 17(47), 81-106. doi:10.25115/ejrep.v17i47.2156
  • Mason, B. J., & Bruning, R. (2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: What the research tell us. 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(2), 113-139. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9010-7
  • Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32(1-2), 99-113. doi:10.1023/b:truc.0000021811.66966.1d
  • Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback research revisited. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, , 745-783.
  • Narciss, S. (2013). Designing and evaluating tutoring feedback strategies for digital learning environments on the basis of the interactive tutoring feedback model. Digital Education Review, 23(1), 7-26.
  • 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. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.51.3.214
  • Narciss, S., & Huth, K. (2004). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia learning. Instructional Design for Multimedia Learning, , 181-195.
  • Narciss, S., Sosnovsky, S., Schnaubert, L., Andrès, E., Eichelmann, A., Goguadze, G., & Melis, E. (2014). Exploring feedback and student characteristics relevant for personalizing feedback strategies. Computers and Education, 71, 56-76. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.011
  • Ness, M. (2011). Explicit reading comprehension instruction in elementary classrooms: Teacher use of reading comprehension strategies. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(1), 98-117. doi:10.1080/02568543.2010.531076
  • Nicol, D., & MacFarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and selfregulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218. doi:10.1080/03075070600572090
  • Rouet, J. -., Britt, M. A., & Durik, A. M. (2017). RESOLV: Readers' representation of reading contexts and tasks. Educational Psychologist, 52(3), 200-215. doi:10.1080/00461520.2017.1329015
  • Rupp, A. A., Ferne, T., & Choi, H. (2006). How assessing reading comprehension with multiple-choice questions shapes the construct: A cognitive processing perspective. Language Testing, 23(4), 441-474. doi:10.1191/0265532206lt337oa
  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189. doi:10.3102/0034654307313795
  • Stobart, G. (2008). Testing times: The uses and abuses of assessment. Testing times: The uses and abuses of assessment (pp. 1-218) doi:10.4324/9780203930502
  • Swart, E. K., Nielen, T. M. J., & Sikkema-de Jong, M. T. (2018). Supporting reading comprehension: A meta-analysis on when and how to provide feedback during reading. The 25th Annual Meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading,
  • Timmers, C., & Veldkamp, B. (2011). Attention paid to feedback provided by a computer-based assessment for learning on information literacy. Computers and Education, 56(3), 923-930. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.007
  • Timms, M., Develle, S., & Lay, D. (2016). Towards a model of how learners process feedback: A deeper look at learning. Australian Journal of Education, 60(2), 128-145. doi:10.1177/0004944116652912
  • Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C. W., & 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
  • Van Der Kleij, F. M., Timmers, C. F., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2011). The effectiveness of methods for providing written feedback through a computer-based assessment for learning: A systematic review. Cadmo, 19(1), 21-38.
  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., Ferrer, A., Ávila, V., Martínez, T., Mañá, A., . . . Serrano, M. -. (2014). TuinLEC, an intelligent tutoring system to improve reading literacy skills / TuinLEC, un tutor inteligente para mejorar la competencia lectora. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 37(1), 25-56. doi:10.1080/02103702.2014.881657
  • 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., Gil, L., García, A., & Máñez, I. (2019). Learning tasks in electronic environments: Advances towards interactive eTextbooks. Deep Comprehension: Multi-Disciplinary Approaches to Understanding, Enhancing, and Measuring Comprehension,
  • Vidal-Abarca, E., Martinez, T., Salmerón, L., Cerdán, R., Gilabert, R., Gil, L., . . . Ferris, R. (2011). Recording online 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., Martínez, T., Serrano, M. A., Gil, L., Maña, A., Máñez, I., & Garcia, D. (2018). Read&Learn: A research tool to record online processing while learning. Poster Presented at the 28th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text & Discourse,
  • Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice, , 277-304.
La source de données: Dialnet