Feedback in Computer Assisted Instruction
- 1 February 1977
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Programmed Learning and Educational Technology
- Vol. 14 (1) , 43-49
- https://doi.org/10.1080/1355800770140107
Abstract
The provision of immediate feedback is one of the strengths of computer‐assisted instruction. However, the manner of its action is far from clear, with information‐providing, reinforcing and attention‐directing theories vying to account for its effect in various learning situations. In the present study, which used an adjunct statistics‐teaching programme, feedback providing the correct answer was found to be superior to feed‐back simply saying whether the student's answer was correct or wrong; and this in turn was found to be superior to the total absence of feedback. Thus information‐providing feedback was found to be the most potent, the locus of its action being in error correction. The results also suggest that the error‐locating and error‐correcting functions of feedback can be separated with possible advantages for instruction.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Educational Technology and the Learning ProcessEducational Researcher, 1974
- Delay-retention effect with multiple-choice tests.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1972
- Feedback procedures in programmed instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1971
- Feedback and sentence learningJournal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1971
- Comparison of several feedback methods for correcting errors by computer-assisted instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1969
- Instructional PsychologyAnnual Review of Psychology, 1969
- Reflection-impulsivity: The generality and dynamics of conceptual tempo.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1966
- Models for optimizing the learning process.Psychological Bulletin, 1966
- Reinforcement schedules, scholastic aptitude, autonomy need, and achievement in a programed course.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1965
- Acquisition and extinction with different verbal reinforcement combinations.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1956