Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effects of different feedback strategies using computer-administered multiple-choice questions as instruction

  • Research
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of using different forms of computer-based feedback on high school students' learning of science material. The basic design consisted of two conditions of instructional support (text and questions vs. questions only), two testings (immediate vs. retention), five levels of similarity between lesson and posttest questions, and five feedback conditions: knowledge of correct response (KCR), delayed KCR, answer until correct (AUC), questions only (no feedback), and no questions. Results showed significant benefits for feedback over no feedback, with AUC becoming more advantageous and delayed feedback less so as lesson-posttest question similarity decreased. Also, with decreased question similarity and the availability of supporting text, overall feedback effects tended to decrease. The results are discussed in terms of the information processing effects of the different feedback forms, a factor that CBI designers often fail to exploit in planning feedback conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, R. C. (1972). How to construct achievement tests to assess comprehension.Review of Educational Research, 42(2), 145–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andre, T. (1979). Does answering higher-level questions while reading facilitate productive learning?Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 280–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Angell, G. W. (1949). The effect of immediate knowledge of quiz results on final examination scores in freshman chemistry.Journal of Educational Research, 42(5), 391–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bormuth, J. R., Manning, J., Carr, J., & Pearson, D. (1970). Children's comprehension of between-and within-sentence syntactic structure.Journal of Educational Research, 42(5), 391–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clariana, R. B. (1990). A comparison of AUC feedback and KCR feedback under two conditions of contextualization.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 17(4), 125–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale, E., & Chall, J. (1948, January). A formula for predicting readability.Educational Research Bulletin, 27, pp. 11–20, 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempsey, J. V. (1988). The effects of four methods of immediate corrective feedback on retention, discrimination error, and feedback study time in computer-based instruction.Dissertation Abstracts International, 49(6), 1434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempsey, J.V., & Driscoll, M.P. (1989).The effects of four methods of immediate corrective feedback on retention, discrimination error, and feedback study time in computer-based instruction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

  • Dick, W., & Latta, R. (1970). Comparative effects of ability and presentation mode in computer-assisted instruction and programmed instruction.Audio-Visual Communication Review, 18(3), 34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, K., Williams, S., & Roth, J. (1981). Qualitative and quantitative differences in learning associated with multiple-choice testing.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(5), 449–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flesch, R. F. (1948). A new readability yardstick.Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, 221–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilman, D. A. (1969). Comparison of several feedback methods for correcting errors by computer-assisted instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(6), 503–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, E. R. (1935).The psychology of learning (1st ed.). New York: Harper & Brothers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannafin, M. J., & Reiber, L. P. (1989). Psychological foundations of instructional design for emerging computer-based instructional technologies: Part I.Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(2), 91–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulhavy, R. W. (1977). Feedback in written instruction.Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 211–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulhavy, R. W., & Anderson, R. C. (1972). Delay-retention effect with multiple-choice tests.Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(5), 505–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude.Educational Psychology Review, 1, 279–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning.Review of Educational Research, 58(1), 79–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, J. (1985).Levels of questioning and forms of feedback: Instructional factors in courseware design. Paper presented at the 1985 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 266 766)

  • Merrill, J. (1987). Levels of questioning and forms of feedback: Instructional factors in courseware design.Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 14, 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, D. E. (1965).Adjunct to self-study for aircrew refresher training under operational conditions in the Air Defense Command. Aerospace Medical Research Labs, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 131 830)

  • More, A. J. (1969). Delay of feedback and the acquisition and retention of verbal materials in the classroom.Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(5), 339–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. I., Williams, R. G., & Hiller, J. H. (1974). Delay of information feedback in an applied setting: Effects on initially learned and unlearned items.Journal of Experimental Education, 42(4), 55–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noonan, J. V. (1984). Feedback procedures in computer-assisted instruction: Knowledge-of-results, knowledge-of-correct-response, process explanations, and second attempts after explanations.Dissertation Abstracts International, 45(1), 131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peeck, J., & Tillema, H. H. (1978). Delay of feedback and retention of correct and incorrect responses.Journal of Experimental Education, 38, 139–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, S. L. (1926). A simple apparatus which gives tests and scores—and teaches.School and Society, 23, 373–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressey, S. L. (1950). Development and appraisal of devices providing immediate automatic scoring of objective tests and concomitant self-instruction.The Journal of Psychology, 29, 417–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, E. Z. (1966). Learning from written instructive materials: An exploration of the control of inspection behavior by test-like events.American Educational Research Journal, 3(4), 241–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schimmel, B. J. (1983).A meta-analysis of feedback to learners in computerized and programmed instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 233 708)

  • Schimmel, B. J. (1986). Feedback use by low-ability students in computer-based education.Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(11), 4068.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1988).Educational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P. L. (1988).Toward a taxonomy of feedback: Content and scheduling. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, New Orleans, LA.

  • Spock, P. A. (1987). Feedback and confidence of response for a rule-learning task using computer-assisted instruction.Dissertation Abstracts International, 48(5), 1109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturges, P. T. (1978). Delay of informative feedback in computer-assisted testing.Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(3), 378–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suber, J. R., & Anderson, R. C. (1975). Delay-retention effect in natural classroom settings.Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(2), 170–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tait, K., Hartley, J. R., & Anderson, R. C. (1973). Feedback procedures in computer-assisted arithmetic instruction.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 43, 161–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, E. L. (1931).Human learning. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travers, R. M. W., Van Wagenen, R. K., Haygood, D. H., & McCormick, M. (1964). Learning as a consequence of the learner's task involvement under different conditions of feedback.Journal of Educational Psychology, 65(3), 167–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, B. J. (1963). Stimulus selection in verbal learning. In C. J. Cofer and B. S. Musgrave (Eds.),Verbal behavior and verbal learning: Problems and processes. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldrop, P. B., Justin, J. E., & Adams, T. M. (1986). A comparison of three types of feedback in a computer-assisted instruction task.Educational Technology, 26, 43–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolfolk, A. (1990).Educational psychology for teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Memphis State University, USA

    Roy B. Clariana, Steven M. Ross & Gary R. Morrison

Authors
  1. Roy B. Clariana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven M. Ross
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gary R. Morrison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This article is based on a doctoral dissertation submitted to the faculty of Memphis State University by the first author. Reprint requests should be addressed to Steven M. Ross, Department of Foundations of Education, Memphis State University, Memphis, TN 38152.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Clariana, R.B., Ross, S.M. & Morrison, G.R. The effects of different feedback strategies using computer-administered multiple-choice questions as instruction. ETR&D 39, 5–17 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298149

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02298149

Keywords

Search

Navigation